Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Fritz Geier,. consultant" noted that his :firn'1 had vvorked for a l'1Urrlber o:t- developments <br />over tl""l.e past 25 years,. includi.n.g Greenbriar projects. He noted that the arran.gelTlents <br />vvere sin'1ilar to those required by the City,. vvherein they 'VVere paid by the public agen.cy. <br />He .l""l.oted th..at they had done one FIR for a Greenbriar project previously. <br /> <br />Bonnie UIT1phreys,. 678 Sycamore Creek "VVay" noted tl-:tat her l-:tome 'VVould be a:trected by <br />th..e tra:tl:IC :trOlTl I--,und Ranch II and th.e traf1-1c con'l.ing dovvn 1-ro1'n the bypass road. She <br />ackl"1ovvledged the support she"d received fron, the City vvith respect to previol..ls <br />Greenbriar issues she had experienced_ She believed the City had acknovvledged tl"'1e <br />traffic problem in the area vvitl'1 the placement 01-- speed 1T1easurement and tratl'-1.c counting_ <br />SI'1e had tried to sell her home,. and received ofTers substantially belovv vvhat sl'1e had <br />otTered_ She believed the potential traffic ill""l.pacts l""l.ad affected tl""l.e resale price_ <br /> <br />Sherry Louie,. 570 Sycamore Creek ""VVay,. expressed concern abol...1.t her cl-:tildren"s sa:tety <br />and excessive speed of traffic on the street. <br /> <br />Kran.ti ~chant.a,. 872 Sycamore Creek ""VVay,. noted that he had bought his house a year ago <br />tl"'1rough an agent,. and believed that. Greenbriar had earned." t.hen betrayed,. his trust:. He <br />vvas not avvare of the Lund Ranch II plans. As a gen..eral surgeOl'1" l'1e V\fas avvare ofvvhat <br />traUIT'la a car irnpact vvould inflict on a cl"'1ild." and vvas very concerncd abou1: the addition <br />or 1,,500 cars to tl""1e safety o:t-tl'1e children. I-Ie noted that n,ost of the 300 cl""l.ildrel"1 in. tl"1e <br />COnTITl.Unity V\fere younger tl'1an 10 years old." aI'1d because there vvas no dedicated park il'1 <br />tl""l.e l"1eigl"1borl"'1ood,. the cl'1ildren vvould need to play indoors. <br /> <br />Katja Kamangar noted that she listened very caref-ully to the pl.-1.blic"s con,n,cnts,. and <br />thanked t.herrr for their COll""l.ments. She noted that the disclosures l-:tad been signed by tl-:te <br />h01Tleovvners,. and understood their -trustrations_ <br /> <br />TFl:E PUBLIC Fl:EARING ~ AS CLOSED. <br /> <br />Con'1missioner Roberts inquired vvl""l.at the City vvas doing to n:1aintain the open space on <br />the Koopmann property" and vvl""l.ether the City had any involvement V\fith the salarnander <br />preserve at Ruby I'lills. She noted that grazing lands vvere often overlooked,. and il"1ql...1.ired <br />about the possibility of transfer developmellt rights. She noted that building on ridges <br />vvere 1'10t alloV\fed anyvvhere else in the City" and believed that alternative access ml...1.st be <br />explored and included_ She V"Vould like to see neighborhood traf-rIc caln__--.ing and haul <br />routes addressed. She expressed concern about the major grading plans and tree Joss. She <br />noted that the Land Use Element oftl"le General Plan encouraged "''''lovver intel""1sity uses <br />in"1n"1cdiately il"1side tl'1e l...1.rban grovvth boundary as necessary tc), prevent potential lanel <br />cOl'1f:"l.icts vvith outlying non-urban uses_"'~ Shc noted tl"1at tl'1C density increase on this <br />property involved the urban grovvth boundary. She believed that the placement of- <br />ai:rordable ],ousing on this lan.d vvas an. OXYITIOrOI'1." ~-u'1d added tl-:tat the degree or grading <br />required 'VVould he a very expensive proposition. She vvould lil<..e to see al'1 analysis <br />according to tl"1e present General Plan. <br /> <br />PLAN1'JING CC>IV1IV1ISSION ]VITNUTES Septen'1ber 24. 2003 <br /> <br />I--">>age 18 <br />