pf07-021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

• Page 1 of 2 � Thomas Paschke From: Mike Darrow Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 11:08 AM To: Thomas Paschke Subject: FW: Thursday meeting From: John Livingston [mailto:livingston@cognoscente.biz] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 7:11 PM To: Mike Darrow Cc: tnoble@westreinc.com Subject: Thursday meeting Mike, Thank you and the rest of the staff for meeting today. I hope your 2 PM meeting went exceptionally well. Here is what I took away from the meeting today. You will be sending me a letter covering the issues we agreed upon and your suggestions for solutions to open issues on Monday next. We meet again Monday along with other developers to discuss the general area concepts. You covered 8 points. They are: 1. Cleveland Median - We agree the median is to be extended. I was previously informed that the City had to undertake any in street improvements but that seems to be available for us to do. We agree to installing the median extension meeting the suggested distance. Anything beyond that point, should the city wish it would be billed to the City. 2. Traffic. I understand that Traffic concerns raised by the Right in - Right out drive access proposed have been satisfied in the City's opinion thru the use of the R-in, R-out and median extension. We all recognize is was concluded traffic would operate at a C or better level and that no further adjustments will be necessary. 3. Special Assessments - I have not agreed to take on any extraordinary special assessments as a part of this PUD process but do agree that 1 will work with staff to enter in to an agreement addressing special assessments that may result from the development of Twin Lakes as a larger development. It is my position that my special assessments will be exclusive of environmental and storm water costs thus recognizing this property's environmental report and the cost of development of on-site storm water management defined in the PUD process. 4. Entrance to Twin Lakes - The proposal defined a future entrance to the proposed Twin Lakes Parkway should it be constructed. I agree, in the event Twin Lakes Parkway is constructed, upon completion of a driveway with access in both directions within the location range indicated on my submission, to the closure of the Cleveland Avenue access unless asked to keep it open by any regulatory agency (i.e., fire department). 5. Park Dedication - We understand that we can pay a fee and that is acceptable with the City. 6. Storm Water - Storm water will be managed on-site thru the use of an underground tube array 7. Plans - You asked me for 2 additional sets of full size plans by next Friday for your use. 8. Design Principals - You asked me as "homework" to revisit the collective efforts put forth in cooperation with the multiple staff meetings, etc, to review the elements of the proposal as they relate to the design principals. We have confirmed the design principals are not incorporated in to the code. I can write a narrative which should encompass the items we've incorporated in to the design addressing elements such as walkability - exterior design, etc to the best of my ability. I am going to address the design as it has been submitted thus far without modification. However I am aware and understand that certain adjustments may and likely will be made to the design such as exact tree placement and species, ground cover, etc. I welcome the opportunity to work thru those suggestions with you and staff. I look forward to receiving your letter and will get the information requested (above) back to you as soon as possible. I would like to know when the earliest date I can ask to have this preliminary plat revisited by the City Council? Warmest regards, John Livingston Cent Ventures 10/31 /2007