01 - Laserfiche WebLink

contains substantially more trees and shrubs, and thought the same would have a positive effect here. Mayor Hosterman asked if the foliage at the neighboring site is actually responsible for noise reduction. Mr. Dolan replied most sound engineers would indicate that the density and depth of vegetation has to be at a certain level before it truly affects noise level. However, every one of them also acknowledges that a visual separation does have positive psychological effects when dealing with noise. He noted that the vegetation at the parcel to the east is actually situated in the railroad right of way. Both Mayor Hosterman and Councilmember Cook - Kallio said neither recalled the vegetation appearing that dense, and questioned if it still exists. Mr. Fialho said the railroad performed significant tree thinning through this section, and it may, in fact, be sparser than indicated in the photos. Councilmember McGovern referred to page 15 of the September 15, 2010 staff report, which states that a 29 -foot high sound wall installed along the railroad line and around the sides of the development would be required to fully mitigate noise issues. Mr. Dolan said it is clearly an issue. Since it is unreasonable to provide this mitigation and develop the property as residential within the City's noise guidelines, this is an acknowledged and accepted limitation of the property. Councilmember McGovern stated that in addition to her issues with density, green space, and trees, she feels the existing bungalow should be restored and maintained as a heritage structure. Councilmember Sullivan asked if the noise study included a profile detailing the impacts on residents as they move further from the noise source. Mr. Otto said noise was analyzed throughout the project site and actual mitigations for the windows vary based on the homes' distance from the railroad tracks. Councilmember Sullivan requested specific data. Councilmember Cook - Kallio said she met with two members of the PHA and viewed the site on her own as well as with the applicant. She said the tree survey map is incorrect and actually shows the property line with a huge setback between the fence and detached garage of the single family home next door. Mr. Otto agreed there is very little setback on the garage and referred her to the full sized plans. Councilmember Cook - Kallio questioned whether this is to Code. Mr. Otto said it does not meet current setback requirements, but guessed it to be an old structure. Councilmember Cook - Kallio confirmed with staff that the installed solar panels were permitted. She referred to page 6 of the staff report, noting that solar collectors must be set back at least 5 feet from a property line. Mr. Otto clarified that the Solar Shade Control Act guidelines stipulate only the conditions that a property must meet to be protected under the act, and not those that the site is generally subject to. Councilmember Sullivan said that regardless of the Solar Shade Control Act, this is a PUD and it is within the discretion of the Council to shift these houses around in a way that they do not interfere with the neighbor's solar panels. Councilmember Cook - Kallio acknowledged the point, but said it seemed a bit disingenuous to complain about the other person's setback. Councilmember Cook - Kallio confirmed with staff that a tree's heritage designation has nothing to do with age or canopy. She struggled with the designation and condition of each tree as listed on the survey. She said she envisioned much different trees than what she saw at the site and City Council Minutes Page 10 of '16 December 7, 2010