pm_070207 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, February 07, 2007 Page 4 screening for residential properties and the applicant’s receptiveness to such remedies, and stating that “the college is committed to finding the best ways to minimize those impacts.” Additional discussion included the applicant attempting, prior to the March meeting, to provide more concrete plans related to specific concerns addressed by residents; safety concerns on- and off-campus; potential property value impacts – positive or negative – with further expansion of the campus buildings and student population on-and off-campus; and whether internal arrangements of buildings and/or activities could be provided to reduce community- wide and neighborhood impacts due to the proposed expansion and increased student enrollment. Commissioner Gasongo suggested that the college consider a potential “Park and Ride” facility outside the campus, and in the community, or other options to reduce noise and traffic impacts. Commissioner Gottfried noted the need to differentiate between parking issues for those students living on-site and those commuting, and the parking and traffic impacts of students within the campus itself and outside the campus and in the community, relating to traffic congestion, parking, residential neighborhood impacts, noise, and student and/or visitor activities on campus that further impacted the community, access, parking, and traffic flow. Commissioner Gottfried questioned the capacity of the existing campus and whether it could continue to grow with the demand and student enrollment, or if a more long-term solution was necessary with possible consideration to another campus location to achieve long-term goals of the college and community impacts. Commissioner Gottfried recognized the benefits of increasing enrollment, but sought a more global, philosophical discussion and considerations by the applicant, with staff’s assistance as appropriate, prior to the March meeting. Further discussion included public transportation and transit options and considerations; student population living on campus compared to those living off campus locally or commuting; attempts by the college to alleviate more of their owner traffic issues through various options; perceived disconnects by attempting to spread students out off-campus, while building a parking ramp on-campus and the purposes of the ramp, whether for on-campus residential students or to facilitate those commuting in; consideration to building the parking ramp next to KTIS, and not bringing the students into the heart of the campus, attempting to reduce noise impacts for neighbors; off-campus shuttle locations; impacts to students living on-campus of a parking ramp also located there; and philosophical and practical concerns in the community without sufficient parking on campus. Mr. Stark advised that staff had been working with the Northwestern College Vice President of Advancement, Amy Carey, on potential solutions to the vastly underserved campus by Metropolitan Transit; and attempts to rectify that situation to better serve the college and the community overall. Mr. Stark hoped to be able to provide additional information at the March meeting on those discussions. Mr. Stark noted that, when discussions were held in August of 2006, Northwestern had worked out an agreement with Bethel University to partner in utilizing circulator buses and other possible transit solutions. Commissioner Wozniak questioned impacts with a proposed new field house, realignment of the fields, and additional activities in hosting athletic events during the week or on weekends; and how parking capacity would absorb parking at those events without further impacting streets.