2005_0228_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I quantity (flow control and volume) protection and preservation. He explained the water '' quality concerns for Lake McCarrons and asked that it be a condition of approval of the � concept. He referred to his letter to the Commission of January 31, 2005. The pond in the � southeast comer only treats 20°/o of the site. Chair Mulder referred to item 83 in the staff ti report, wherein the city reviews and approves the project. ?� � L� 1�] 11 C' € :} [� �� L�� ]- :� � �,f ?f] �] �� �' , ,� �� �1} �� �� �{} x�. i �I �.: ,},5 �f i3 �;� .�� ?� �� :a, a �I �� � :�. .�.� �� t't'� Member Bakeman said typical conditions are "subject to review by the Watershed". Duane Haukebo, 1731 Galtier St., Galilee Lutheran Church, explained about the church working with NIr. Guptil. The church hired a consultant to review additions for the Church and still have shared parking with NIr. Guptil, up to ten parking spaces within a shared access andparking easement. Mr. Guptil responded that parking is critical and it will require ��. senior housing requirements to reduce overall need. Tom Tschida explained that shared parking is a hassle -� will church successors have to comply? Is tlzere a deep pond? Thomas Paschke explained current city policy regarding parking and storm water. NIr. Tschida said there are too many unknowns to approve. Jerome Wagner explained he is concerned with McCarrons lake, a ground water lake. Currently the lake is a surface water lal�e maj ority of water drains in from surface area. McCarrons has lost 50°/o of its ground water. Each year the city should replace a percentage of that ground water through ground water recharge areas. McCarrons is an 80 acre lake within an 800 acre watershed. Thermal mitigation has not been a serious issue. With recharge engineering the lake could make up recharge lost since the 1970s. Brian, Elmer Street, suggested no north-south street and four to six units; 160 and 170 Elmer could be refaced using grant funds (HRA}. Chair Mulder closed th� hearing, Deb Bloom explained the cooperative requirement with Capitol Region Watershed Member Traynor explained he was supportive of the plan. Density is always at� issue, but what was expected on this site. Traffic is not sent through neighborhoods, but rather to Rice Street. Parking and water issues must be worked on. The materials ai�d/s�yle used should be improved to be consistent with the neighborhood. Member Bakeinan explained how she appreciated the work with the neighborhood. Keep the building as open age as possible. Parking must be corrected. She supported the plan, with review by Capitol Region Watershed District. Density, watershed, parking and the Park Corr�n�ission are concerns of Member poherty. Page 9