SR 05:154 - Laserfiche WebLink

ATTACHMENT 2 proposal, this would be inadequate. As the Federal Highway Transportation Agency publications indicate, vegetation is a much less effective noise attenuator than solid walls. Them is simply not enough room to install an adequate amount of vegetation for that purpose. At a meeting with the Masonic Lodge executive meeting on this proposal, a congregational member remarked that the church always had plans to put a wall around that area. Why such a wall is not in the proposed plans is curious. Perhaps it was another disingenuous promise to reduce resistance to the project without having to fulfill an obligation. While at the three public meetings, the church (as the staff report indicates) stated they have no plans to expand their daycare operation. However, at a subsequent Valley Trails homeowners meeting, church officials finally admitted such an expansion is planned. Valley Trails has had a similar bad experience with the city in such a manner. The Evangelical Free Church at the west end of the Valley Trails "loop" had NEVER been in compliance with the zoning conditions for their property since the church was built over 20 years ago. Yet, the city allowed them to start a preschool operation on the site BEFORE approval of a permit and ANY public input. As stated before, the day care operation at St. Clare's has been expanded at least twice without notification of the residents. Therefore it is imperative to put into place measures that are as firm as possible to prevent the church from expanding, day care, preschool, schooling activities, etc. I wish I could propose a physical structural feature that would prevent such an expansion, but I cannot think of one. But Condition 10 of Exhibit B is far too weak A prohibition of any expansion in perpetuity with severe, automatic punishment for violations is needed. Responses to the staff report: Page 4: The staff report, implies that St. Clare's has been a good neighbor. I disagree. As mentioned above, their playground condition, expansion, false promises of parking control and their refusal to consider counter proposals are not actions of a good neighbor. I do not believe that either phase will physically improve and aesthetically enhance the site. Rather, it would require parking lots and the other impacts described above impacting the surrounding neighborhood. Page 5: St. Clare's commitment to educate its members on parking is completely ineffective. The staff belief that the hammerhead design responds to the issues of the residems is false. It answers only the driveway issue. Many other issues were unregarded. The visibility aspect of the proposal is superb indication of how St. Clare treats people. They want the new sanctuary as close to Hopyard as possible for marketing reasons. However, the Masons do not want visual competition from the church. Because the church is dependant on the Masons for joint use of Masonic owned property, their