PC 04/13/83 - Laserfiche WebLink

PLANNING COMMISSION Page 20 Eleanor Peabody, 5143 Oakdale Court said there would be 100+ units in the area. She said there would be a problem with children on bikes, lack of police patrol and foresees problems with both the Fire and Police Departments. She .asked where the management would be -- on site, or off. She also asked who would maintain the picnic areas. She urged the Commission not to allow the units to have flat roofs. She sited the problem the Stoneridge Townhouses have had for quite some time. She further said more cars would be parked in the area than indicated because many people have adult children living at home. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Cranston rebutted the statements of the speakers who spoke in opposition to the project. He further stated that in Dick Ivy's opinion (Barton Aschman & Associations) there would not be a traffic problem. He indicated that aesthetically the project is good. Further there would be on-site management. He said their acoustical study has been completed. Mr. Cranston said the nature of the development doesn't encourage persons to move to the project with children. He stated that the roofs have a 1-12 pitch and are not totally flat. All of the work will be done by his company and nothing will be subcontracted out. He indicated they are 'hands on' oriented. Chairperson Lindsey stated that the petitions submitted seem to be signed by everyone in the area. Commissioner Doherty felt a communications problem has arisen. Commissioner Jamieson supported these comments and would not want to conclude this matter with everyone at odds. Commissioner Wilson said he believes Stoneridge is going to build another 225 units and the project should be more compatible with the area. Chairperson Lindsey felt that the City needs rental units and was disappointed in the lack of communcation between the developer and surrounding property owners. Commissioner Getty asked if the applicant if they have sewer permits. The applicant responded that they have seven. Commissioner Jamieson felt that this project should be delayed and could see no hurry in pushing this project through for only seven sewer permits. The applicant indicated they would try to work with the City for this regard. A motion was made by Commissioner Getty, seconded by Commissioner Doherty to continue case PUD-83-6 to 4/27/83 for the reasons stated in the testimony. This motion was unanimously carried.