Agenda - Council - 07/12/2022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

From: Danielle Holder To: Chris Anderson; Brian Hagen Subject: PACT Charter school Date: Thursday,June 23,2022 2:48:12 PM Good Afternoon, I am writing to provide comments for the Planning Commission regarding the Site Plan review for the PACT charter school. As of the May Planning Commision meeting myself and other representatives for the neighborhood have met with the representatives for PACT. During the meeting we discussed our concerns again with the representatives from the developer. The response from the developer was that they have looked at these things and they are not a problem. The representatives for PACT did not wish to discuss solutions only to say that if we (the residents) can engineer a solution they, the builder, will look at it. In fact the only solution they suggested is that neighbors could have extra dirt to fix their properties if available. So far minimal changes have been made and no noise study that includes the HVAC unit and the PA system has been conducted. The school provided the information on the PA system and verbally said from anecdotal evidence that the HVAC won't create a noise disturbance. Currently the light study says that light trespass will be minimal on adjoining properties. The adjoining property owners believe that reality is greater or the noise level is too loud or the school decides to use the field more frequently there is no easy path for the neighbors to address the increase of the nuisance of the noise and light over time. If the school is unwilling to address that potential then there should be no lighting or PA allowed in the field area. There really never should have been given the proximity to private homes. The representative still has not provided the examples of a project where the stadium was built that close to private homes and how noise and light are addressed. By moving this forward without a plan in place to deal with the disturbances of the games the CIty is saying the rights of these owners to quiet enjoyment of property free from the nuisance of adjoining owners is not important. If the stadium is approved with the lighting and PA the site plan should include a sound wall which would block the noise and also assist with blocking lighting from the lights. A better option would be to not allow a full stadium as outdoor use is not allowed under B 1 business zoning and shouldn't be allowed here either. Additionally no study has been conducted on the impact of drop off and pick up and drop off traffic on 161 st Ave NW and adjoining street Xenolith and 159th Ave NW. The school has since revised the number of cars it believes will be stacking at pickup time to only 40 since they claim that nobody will be forced to park on the local street that is currently signed "no parking". This potential for waiting cars should be addressed either by requiring the school to pay for widening of 161 st Ave to include a shoulder for parking or including an easement for a longer driveway on the church property. However any use of the church property should also include an amendment to the purchase agreement to guarantee that use. I am asking the Planning Commission once again to table its decision until the requested changes are made. The plans before the committee for June are essentially the same plans that came before the commission in May and still contain the same deficiencies. Until the applicant addresses the obvious issues of noise, light, water and traffic this should not move forward. The commission and Clty Council has allowed this to move forward to explore whether a reasonable site plan can be engineered. This is not a reasonable site plan if it does