Agenda - Council - 05/09/2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

PAtti Sorkdahl, l?gl0 F..rkium Street N.W., stated her concern with only one access for the exisffng and proposed homes. Megan Wald, representing Shade Tree Communities, stated that her firm has been working with the City for one year on this plat and has been denied. Shade Tree purchased the proper~ to develop it per City Code ~nd they w~nt to work with the City to get something going and it is frustrating to be continually denied. Shade Tree is open to ideas to make the plat Work. The moratorium sparks another issue for Shade Tree; it appears to Shade Tree that the cluster ordinance would not be a major ~ssue ff Shade Tree proposal had not come forward. Shade Tree is willing to work anything out Chairperson Nixt responded that he is sympathetic to Shade Tree's efforts on a challenging piece of properly containing wetlands, limited access, and uncertainty of extension of furore services. The City has to look at the intent behind the cluster ordinance; it is not to assure development, it was intended to establish appropriate standards for development. Locating new homes along the common boundary with existing homes hasn't changed throughout the process. Ms. Wald replied that City Council approved that particular layout at a work session and Shade Tree proceeded on that basis. The City's traffic study only called for a stop sign; it didn't say there is a traffic issue with the additional traffic. Shade Tree is willing to eliminate some of the lots if that is what the City wants. Shade Tree is not sure how to proceed based on information received. There are many ways to deal with density transitioning; several lots could be eliminated on the north property line; more trees can be added on the east property line. Chair~on Nixt stated that the proposed project does not fit for other reasons also· Mr. Nixt quoted certain sections of the Comprehensive Plan addressing the Rural Developing area: "Because of this very low-density pattern of development and the numerous wetlands, the extension of urban services to the rural developing area is not practical or financially feasible"; "encourage preservation of open space and natural resources beyond what is required by ordinance or other legal means through the PUD process"; en~ourage environmentally sensitive and open space design and construction techniques that preserve natural resources within private control"; "plans reflect strong sensitivity to protecting and enhancing natural resources, particularly in relation to the greenway corridor system"· Chairperson Nixt referred to the cluster ordinance which states that the location of the houses in relationship to houses on adjacent · ' 'aeration, as well as current and future streets and e~se~me, n,ts. B_o~th versions oropertles is a conm . J ,_ a ....'t see any meamngrul cnang¢~- ~f Shade Tree's preliminary plat had ~ssues ana ne uv~,* ~ Megan Wald responded that Shade Tree is meeting the literal requirements of the cluster ordinance, but there are some issues that Shade Tree cannot change, like the second access; Shade Tree can only change what they control. Ms. Wald reiterated that they can add more trees to the east property line and reduce the number of lots on the north property line. Planning Commission/April 24, 2006 Page 3 of 5 -31-