Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />March 20, 2008 <br />Page 3 of 8 <br /> <br />. Utility Plans & Ditch Improvements: A lift station is proposed to provide for the <br />distribution of the sanitary flows from the development to the gravity-based sanitary <br />mains. The location of the lift station is proposed for Outlot U, near the intersection <br />of Hecla Dr. and Paschal Dr. The applicant is also working with the Davidson <br />Highline Ditch Company to secure approval of proposed improvements and piping of <br />a portion of the Davidson Ditch. <br />. Final PUD development plan: Reflects phasing of the four plan areas as follows: #1 is <br />Phase 2; #2 is Phase 1; #3 is Phase 1; and #4 is Phase 3. <br />. Phase 1 will include the following improvements: 1) Paschal Dr., Hecla Dr., and <br />HWY 42 improvements, 2) Sanitary lift station; 3) Bullhead Gulch (floodplain <br />improvements) and 4) Central and Commons Parks, Linear Park and all trail <br />construction. <br />. Bulk and Dimension Standards and Guidelines: It is the position of staff that more <br />time is needed to reconcile staff comments with the applicant's intent with regard to <br />defining an appropriate footprint and design standards for the applicable building <br />type. <br />Wood summarized staff is recommending a continuance of the application to the April 17, 2008 <br />meeting to address the numerous outstanding issues discussed in the staff report and <br />presentation. <br /> <br />Commission Questions: <br />Hartman inquired about the fiscal analysis and if it had been validated by the City. She also <br />asked if a timeline was available for Phase 2, CommerciallRetail. <br /> <br />Wood stated the fiscal analysis had not been validated by the City. He reminded the Commission <br />the company, EPS, used by Takoda was previously used by North End. He suggested the <br />applicant address the timeline for Phase 2 development. <br /> <br />Loo requested a clarification to the letter from the Open Space Advisory Board. <br /> <br />Wood discussed that connectivity is considered an off-site improvement and is not part of the <br />entitlement to the property. <br /> <br />Lipton discussed the design, how it dead ends at the RR track and questioned how they cross the <br />track to gain connection with the trail on the other side. <br /> <br />Tom Phare, Public Works Director, stated they are coordinating the trail connectivity with the <br />FasTracks. <br /> <br />Tengler asked if the traffic study had considered access to Main St. <br /> <br />Wood stated that LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. would be better at answering his <br />question. <br /> <br />Russell had questions about Paschal Dr. and what agreements are or will be in place for sharing <br />that street with Lafayette. <br /> <br />Wood stated a new IGA has been developed with the understanding that the 1st developer to <br />construct their project would be responsible for the construction of Paschal Dr. with the cost to <br />be shared by each community. <br /> <br />Russell asked about maintenance of Paschal. <br />