PC 032906 - Laserfiche WebLink

~ sidewalk would not be able to meander for a rural feel. The fire trucks would be able to navigate a 24-foot-wide street. Matt Lawer, 3750 Cameron Avenue, noted that he was directly impacted by the project and would like significant consideration to be taken with their concerns. He displayed the site and would like the U-shaped entrance to be reconfigured to another path that would go through as displayed. He did not want atwo-way or four-way intersection to impact his home. He was very concerned about the impact of the street design and sidewalks on his quality of life. Janice Cain, 2033 Palmer Drive, noted that she was one of the original owners on Palmer Drive and added that her home elevations allowed them full view of the field from the kitchen window. She noted that view would disappear with the development. She wished to correct her statement on Exhibit D; she did not say the homes were "appealing," but rather that they were "appalling." She believed they were too lazge and opulent for the neighborhood. She took issue with the statement on page 4 stating that the last 30 minutes were spent giving kudos to Ponderosa Homes; she remembered some speakers stating that the representatives were very good to work with, and she agreed. But she did not believe that went on for 30 minutes. She noted that with respect to the Cameron Avenue traffic issue, she saw many pazents who were not from Palmer Drive driving their children to school using the Cameron Avenue access. She noted that the Mohr School traffic was horrendous. She did not want Mr. Ketell's home to be negatively impacted by a sidewalk, but would like some kind of safe passage in that azea. ~" She complimented the Ponderosa representatives on being easy to work with and added that they had been very accommodating to her and her neighbors. Mark Tucker, 1844 Martin Avenue, wished to compliment Ponderosa on its outreach to the neighbors and added that its representatives did not pit the neighbors against one another. He believed the project had a logical layout and that the homes were fine. He believed the sidewalk was a valid concern and added that the speed of traffic in the neighborhood was a major concern. He did not want to lose the rural appeal of the neighborhood, especially with traffic-calming devices. Kelly Cousins, Cameron Avenue, distributed handouts to the Commissioners describing several traffic options that she had developed. She believed that Cameron Avenue received the bulk of the traffic disruption and believed that Cameron Avenue should have limited parking. Nancy Krakauer, 1969 Palmer Drive, believed a sidewalk along Cameron Avenue would promote greater safety and did have sympathy for the neighbors who would be affected. Jed Sussman, Cameron Avenue, was not in attendance to speak. Terry & Debbie Leuthauser, 3623 Cameron Avenue, noted that their property was located directly east of the proposed development. Mr. Leuthauser agreed with Mr. Ketell's ~.~. comments and the reseazch he did. He noted they had moved from a Waal azea of PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Mazch 29, 2006 Page 19 of 25