PC 12/10/97 - Laserfiche WebLink

~ ~ . . . Commissioner Barker commented that the new development would be creating additional traffic and noise. She, therefore, recommended a condition that the developer mitigate noise control for the affected homes along Sycamore Road, specifically lots 1 through 10, by installing double- pane windows as sound protection, in lieu of a sound barrier. Commissioner Wright feels that would be an unfair request. Mr. Iserson suggested that the Commission defer this issue to the tentative map stage in order to allow time for an additional noise study to be conducted. PUBLIC HEARING WAS REOPENED Mr. Costanzo noted that Greenbriar has already conducted a noise study and it showed that the noise decibel level did not extend beyond 25 or 30 feet, and all of the homes would be set back farther than that. He further stated that it would be unfair to start conditioning the project to make upgrades on the homes and that the developer would oppose such a condition. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Commissioner Barker maintained her position and feels strongly that the developer should make every attempt to mitigate the traffic noise. The rest of the Commission did not support this position. A motion was made by Commission Barker recommending that the developer provide sound control by way of double paned windows for the neighbors impacted by increased traffic and noise along Sycamore Road. The motion was not supported and, therefore, no further action was taken. In response to a question by Chair Cooper, Mr. Iserson explained that development fees would only have to be paid by a property owner if they chose to subdivide their property. He further explained that each property was assigned a share based upon its density and that was part of the original agreement with the NSSP. A more detailed, lengthy discussion took place and Mr. Iserson reiterated that the fees would apply only if an owner subdivided their property. Mr. Plucker also commented that Greenbriar was considering adjusting the finance plan so that existing lots would be exempt from paying such fees. PUBLIC HEARING WAS REOPENED Mr. Costanzo stated that Greenbriar offered to waive development fees from the Moreira property and they declined because they wanted the fees to be exempt on their agricultural lot as well. Negotiations are continuing with the Moreira's and their attorney. Mrs. Moreira stated that she feels the her current property, as well as all other property owners in the area, should be exempt from paying development fees if they choose to sub-divide their property in the future. Planning Commission Page 13 December 10, 1997