My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2022 09 22
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2022 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2022 09 22
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/21/2022 9:42:25 AM
Creation date
9/21/2022 9:34:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
9/22/2022
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
290
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />September 08, 2022 <br />Page 4 of 13 <br />private shuttles and a TDM coordinator that can work with the businesses is a goal. <br />Staff are more focused on creating a structure that can sustain transportation and can <br />adapt to technological transportation advancements. As far as targets and goals for <br />25%, staff are all hopeful that all of the city's developments continue to decrease single <br />person vehicle occupancy. <br />Diehl asks in terms of the traffic study, is this a consultant that the applicant paid for? <br />Zuccaro says the traffic study and analysis is the applicant's consultant. City staff has <br />been working with its own consultant to assist with the staff review of the traffic study. <br />Diehl asks if staff can describe how the sustainability conversation went with the <br />applicant. Did the importance of it come up? <br />Zuccaro says it was not discussed to that large an extent. The focus was building to the <br />2010 GDP and reviewing the plat documents to ensure that they complied with the <br />GDP. He does not recall a specific discussion or a request from staff for a sustainability <br />plan. <br />Osterman asks about the grading plan and cut/fill. She is trying to understand how <br />much of the land will be left in a natural state. <br />Zuccaro shows the area that is public land dedication and a trail/street being graded in. <br />That is the largest undisturbed area. He shows a few other smaller areas that are part of <br />the open space land dedication. One thing staff has been working on with the applicant <br />is habitat restoration and the applicant is working with a consultant on that concept. <br />Osterman says they are open spaces but will still be modified and left in a natural state. <br />Zuccaro says they would have to be restored where they are graded. After that, the city <br />will require that they restore them to a natural state. <br />Osterman says given that is the case, has there been an analysis on the environmental <br />impact? <br />Zuccaro says with the GDP from last year, there was a wildlife inventory and that was <br />not included in this packet but we can present that to the commission if needed. Looking <br />at the subdivision criteria, there are criteria about preserving the natural areas. It does <br />not mean you preserve every undisturbed area of the development. <br />Howe says when the net public land dedication is being calculated, the northwest and <br />pond area were highlighted. The land adjacent to Highway 36, is that also a part of the <br />69.3 acres? <br />Zuccaro says the applicant is proposing an 18-acre area near Highway 36, which would <br />be dedicated public land. Staff is proposing that remain private open land that is not <br />developed upon. The net public land dedication numbers mentioned in the presentation <br />do not include that number. <br />Howe says when talking about grading, are we talking about preservation of trees and <br />other things? Is it just flattening the land? <br />Zuccaro says if you are doing grading and there are trees there, you typically remove <br />those trees. <br />Howe says if you are grading the majority of that site for construction, he imagines it <br />would be difficult to leave certain parts ungraded and natural because it would affect the <br />areas that are graded. <br />Zuccaro says yes, you would have to be thoughtful of the places undisturbed still <br />working within the drainage plan. <br />Krantz says a part of the subdivision application should show trees and other natural <br />features. She does not think that was included in the packet and believes that is a <br />requirement for a preliminary plat. She would like to be able to see where those would <br />be on the site. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.