2011_0718_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachment G 6. Vision? My final comments concern the vision behind the proposed plan. It is hard to see how the plan promotes mixed use or "New Urbanist"' development. The regulating plan looks very much like existing commercial areas on the other side of 35W. There is no integration of uses, no "traditional neighborhood development"', just big-box buildings and parking lots, with minimal setbacks, greenspace, and buffers. The plan lacks incentives,, regulations, or "tools" to encourage genuine mixed use development. There is no discussion of environmental concerns or economic development goals. There is no provision for housing, and given the lack of greenspace and buffers, it would be very difficult to create a liveable,, attractive residential neighborhood in the midst of large- scale commercial development. I believe that the city should continue to use and follow the Twin Lakes Master Plan of 001, which was previously part of our comprehensive plan. It included a detailed narrative describing the kind of mixed-use development envisioned for Twin Lakes. It was based on significant public input from businesses and residents, and had community support. It included a range of different development scenarios for the entire Twin Lakes area (not just the western portion). It provided a framework with some meaningful guidelines for economic development and environmental protection. The emphasis on open, undefined "flexibility"' in the proposed new regulating plan is a clear invitation to exactly the piecemeal development that previous plans were designed to prevent. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments to the planning commission. Please feel free to contact me with any questions about these issues,, or about the potential impact of the Twin Lakes regulating plan on the Twin Lakes neighborhood and Langton Lake park.