pm_061101 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, November 01, 2006 Page 14 Tam McGehee, 77 Mid Oaks Lane Ms. McGehee questioned the actual number of proposed housing units; and questioned why the Twin Lakes Parkway was not being shown as continuous on tonight’s drawings, when it was shown as continuous at the recently-held, applicant-sponsored, open houses. Mr. Stark noted that the concept approval PUD didn’t require a finite unit count. Ms. McGehee advised that the rerouting of traffic, during peak hours, off Fairview and away from residential areas, had always been an issue, and discussions were held at the open houses, and needed to be pursued. Yul Yost, 3015 Fairview Mr. Yost had extensive questions and comments related to storm water drainage and depth of the proposed holding ponds; presented his calculations for runoff; questioned how the developer proposed to handle impervious surface runoff; enhanced protection of Langton Lake; access to the ponds by City staff for ongoing maintenance; and his maintenance of the north end holding ponds to-date. Considerable discussion was held among Mr. Yost, staff and Commissions, and Mr. Yost presented his comments in written form in a letter addressed to the Planning Commissioners, attached hereto and made a part thereof. dated November 1, 2006; Ms. Bloom addressed the technical drainage and ponding issues raised by Mr. Yost; thanked him for his continuing service to the community in maintaining the outlets; and alerted the public to upcoming neighborhood meetings to address many of the issues raised by Mr. Yost. Ms. Bloom requested a meeting, outside the Planning Commission venue, to further hear his comments and suggestions for the drainage management in the area, based on his years of observation, and documentation. Dan Cooke, 3070 Shorewood Lane Mr. Cooke had questions on Master Plan principles discussed on Exhibit D in the staff report; protection of neighborhoods with less intrusive land uses; proposed number of housing units; status of the AUAR Update; and concerns regarding traffic. Staff responded to Mr. Cooke regarding staff’s interpretation of land uses and their compatibility. Commissioner Bakeman opined that the existing truck terminals would seem much more intrusive to the neighborhood than the office/residential mix proposed. Mr. Stark advised that the Court of Appeals ruling “trumped” any previous City action to the specifics of the 2001 Master Plan and amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Terry Moses Mr. Moses disputed staff’s comments related to the AUAR and their “intelligent recommendation” to the City Council; and disputed Ms. Bloom’s interpretation of impervious surface estimates (currently 90%), opining that his discussion with a hydrologist noted that much of the site is gravel of Class 4 materials, and not considered impervious. Ms. Bloom clarified that Class 5 or gravel, when packed down, is not the same as green space, and was considered more similar to bituminous surfaces, and treated as such when reviewing development plans. Ms. Bloom reminded listeners that the engineering staff was, in requiring rate controls and water quality was also considering erosion elements of gravel; and respectfully disagreed with Mr. Moses’ comments.