11 ATTACHMENT 01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Posson noted that the slide on the structural element showed a grid system, but the Alternatives deviated from a true grid system. He inquired if there is any advantage to looking at that grid system from the standpoint of optimizing the developable land or accommodating the property lines, or what is easier for the property owners to develop or even for circulation as a third element. Mr. Rasmussen replied that this does make it easier for the property owners to develop, and it is a matter of working out whether a grid or a curvilinear system would be the most efficient way to organize the plan area to keep costs down. He indicated that a curvilinear system requires a bit more land because the geometry is not as efficient, probably by not a whole lot, but that is a consideration. He added that there has been a lot of discussion lately with regard to sustainability and some of the newer mixed-use projects and neo-traditional type plans that are based on the old grid system which dispersed traffic so that particular areas of a neighborhood do not bear most of the burden of traffic. He noted that in this case, the grid itself is self contained and does not change the traffic patterns of cars leaving the site because Busch Road and Boulder Street would take that off under all scenarios. He indicated that some people prefer curvilinear to the grid patterns because the latter has straight streets and looks monotonous, but others think that the grid system now may be more of what is happening today, and more of that is coming back. Mr. Dolan stated that the Alternatives evolved toward a curvilinear pattern at the request of the Task Force; it was not necessarily staffs first choice but there was a consensus that that was what the Task Force wanted and thought it felt more like the rest of the town. Commissioner Olson commented that the City does have a bunch of curvy streets. Commissioner Posson asked Mr. Rasmussen how "major" is defined in the reference made to "major open space buffer" along the railroad track. He expressed concern about noise from the railroad tracks and its impact on the neighborhood. Mr. Rasmussen replied that "major" has not yet been defined and indicated that there will be a significant need for setbacks from the tracks, combined with berming, to solve that noise problem. He noted that Alternative 2 did not maintain the grid system; the others tended to be variations from this and over time evolved out of this. Commissioner Posson noted that Glen Cove and Ironwood are the two closest residential areas, with Ironwood being adjacent to the project site and Glen Cove being an older neighborhood farther up Valley Avenue. He inquired which of the Alternatives is closest to the density and mix, in the case of Ironwood, of these two neighborhoods Mr. Rasmussen replied that the density in Alternative 1 is around four units per acre, and referred to staff for the density of Ironwood. EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 22, 2013 Page 10 of 30