Agenda - Council - 07/22/1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

have been completed within a reasonable period of time and inquired regarding the process should the project not be completed prior to expiration of the permit. Mr. Childs inquired regarding the process and stated he prefers a clear cut expiration of the project incorporating a timeline. Mr. Childs stated if this is a development project, the City should treat it as one by seffing the time line, rules, mining and export activity. He urged the Planning Commission to convince the public that their input has been considered and the decision reached considers the best interest of the people. He restated he sees this as a four-year project and suggested a strict timeline and set of rules. Bob Knoll, 6020 151st Lane NW, stated his concern about the statement on the mount of fill to be removed. He stated this will result in 40,000 truckloads over the duration of the three year project, or one truck load every ten minutes leaving the property. He questioned the performance standards as indicated by the City which requires the submission of a number of documents and asserted there are deficiencies in that information, such as number of trees and vegetation to be impacted or what the end use will be (forested or unforested areas). Mr. Knoll noted the drawing ~nd/cating the silt fence and asked ifa written plan for soil erosion and dust control have been submitted. He asked if this will be a year round project or, if not, what will happen when not being operated. Mr. Knoll stated his main points with regard to deficiencies in the permit are with regard to renovation, final contours, and statement they wig be graded and seeded. He asked if there is enough information at this time to make a decision. He noted the performance standards are fairly explicit and he believes not enough information has been submitted. Mr. Knoll asked about the $10,000 bond or deposit to be made to cover the City's cost of any renovation or road repair. He stated this is a 40-acre project and is concerned about the area of shoreland district due to substantial clear cutting of trees. He stated a significant mount ofplanting of trees may be required and he questions whether a $10,000 bond is sufficient. Mr. Knob commented Mr. Kurak on his ability to protect the development of Fox Knoll in offering to mine that area first and provide a screening barrier. He stated the people of Fox Knoll First Addition have an existing barrier which consists ora row of trees along the wetland. I I I I Kathleen Anderson, 15111 Sodium Street NW', stated she bought her property with the understanding that the property next to her would be developed. She stated she is for progress and believes there will be beautiful homes, but not if there are no trees existing. She stated her concern about living next door to dirt or sand, even with a buffer, and large equipment ha her front yard. Ms. Anderson stated she sees the project submitted only as being a way to earn some cash and believes it is not of benefit to the City or residents surrounding the property. She stated she since, rely hopes the concern with the public and established neighborhoods on both sides will be seriously considered and the permit will be denied based on how it is set up now. Ms. Anderson stated her original impression was that the grading would be limited to several inches of sand and she did not receive any information about the request even though she lives next door. Ms. Anderson expressed concern about the noise, danger, and raping of the land. I I I Loft Schultz?, 6090 151st Avenue, stated they were never notified and when asked ofstaffshe was told it costs too much for the City to update the list provided by the County. She stated she would Public Blearing/Planning Commission/July/~, 1997 Page 3 of 6 157