2011-03-02_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, March 02, 2011 Page 17 Miscellaneous Remaining Drainage Concerns Raised 817 Mr. Wicklund advised that the IDF Curves with the Hirschfield studies provided for 818 protection within the site; recognized previous responses he’d provided on reductions to 819 impacts on the northwest ponds; noted that there was no direct runoff from any of the 820 streets to the southeast corner pond; and noted that the development application process 821 required submission of PRELIMINARY and FINAL Plat for staff review, but noted that the 822 Final Plat required even more excessive detail at a construction document level. 823 In addressing aesthetics from Lexington Avenue and Josephine Road, Mr. Wicklund 824 reiterated that preservation of as many trees as possible was preferred in order to 825 provide a buffer to homes, along with existing berms. 826 Roadway Design 827 Mr. Wicklund advised that roadway designs in the development met requirements of the 828 City’s subdivision ordinance. 829 Site Topography 830 Mr. Wicklund addressed steep grades on some of the lots, noting that while the site was 831 currently steep, it was the developer’s intent to manage the grades and step the homes 832 down in accordance with City Code limits for maximum slopes, and also in compliance 833 with RCWD regulations. 834 Tree Preservation 835 Mr. Wicklund noted that it was of value to Pulte Homes to have mature trees on their 836 development. 837 Open House Timing 838 Mr. Wicklund advised that an Open House was scheduled within the next two (2) weeks 839 prior to the City Council meeting to provide for more specific conversations with 840 residents. Mr. Wicklund advised that the developer would notice the meetings, and 841 provide more specific detail beyond that addressed tonight. Mr. Wicklund advised that it 842 was the developer’s intent to schedule a neighborhood meeting concurrent with tonight’s 843 Public Hearing, however, there was some concern that residents may confuse the two 844 meetings and be unsure of which to attend. Mr. Wicklund advised that, therefore, it had 845 been decided to hold tonight’s Public Hearing at the Planning Commission meeting to 846 highlight the development, and hear overall areas of concern from residents, and then to 847 address those concerns more specifically at the neighborhood meeting, with the 848 developer coming to the meeting prepared to address those concerns in detail. 849 Chair Boerigter closed the Public Hearing at 9:31p.m. 850 City Engineer Bloom 851 At the request of Member Gottfried, Ms. Bloom addressed overall traffic distribution from 852 this site and in the area, including existing conditions and how that traffic may disburse in 853 the future following development of this site, given additional options. 854 Responding to previous public comments related to the timing of the traffic study and a 855 perception of increased summer beach traffic, Ms. Bloom advised that the a.m./p.m. peak 856 studies for work-related traffic were traffic study standards, and were proven to far 857 exceed other daytime traffic. 858 At the request of Member Gottfried, Ms. Bloom reviewed the history of County Road C2 859 and its closure, from 1988 as previously discussed with development of the Lexington 860 Apartments and townhomes south of County Road C2; and strong opposition from the 861 neighborhood causing the developer to remove that connection and construct single- 862 family homes along County Road C2. Ms. Bloom noted that in recent discussions at the 863 PWET Commission meeting, the Chair of that Commission, had at that the time of that 864 construction project, served on the Planning Commission, and provided his historical 865 perspective of the rationale for decision-making. Ms. Bloom advised that, now that she 866 had been provided with copies of the referenced correspondence by residents at tonight’s 867