PC 051006 - Laserfiche WebLink

traffic off of Cameron Avenue, which would connect to Martin Avenue. She displayed and described several alternatives for the curvilineaz alignments. Ponderosa Homes had been particularly receptive to staff s proposal of sepazating the sidewalk with a deeper parkway, although staff did not object to the more common parkway depth. Pamela Hazdy, Ponderosa Homes, noted that they had taken feedback from the neighbors for the past yeaz. She noted that the number of homes had been reduced from 28 to 25, and the square footage of the homes had been reduced by 200 to 400 squaze feet. She noted that azchitectural changes had been made and that the setbacks azound the perimeters had been increased. A template conveyance along the westbound property had been offered in recognition of the modest reaz yard setbacks, which would triple the setback from the new property boundary. The single-family homes were plotted azound the perimeters, and the number of lots azound Cameron Avenue was reduced from five to four lots. A customized design along Cameron was created, providing garage access from the internal loop road and minimizing the appearance of the garage doors. Ms. Hazdy then displayed and described the different azchitectural styles and choices. She noted that the neighbors found the original French Country style to have too much mass, and it had been replaced with a cottage elevation. In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Arkin regazding the sidewalk in front of the properties and the easement, Ms. Decker replied that after the first workshop, the 28-foot wide road street section precluded the opportunity to place a sidewalk along the Ketell property frontage. After direction from the Department of Public Works, Traffic Safety, and Planning Department, staff felt it was important to have a sidewalk and looked at a reasonable road width to determine whether a sidewalk would fit. Alternative 4 proposed a sidewalk but reduced the width of Cameron Avenue. Wes Jost noted that the street was currently 28 feet wide, and the existing subdivision to the south had dedications to the current street. He noted that there was a 2.5-3-foot wide strip that was a public right-of--way. The sidewalk would be placed in a combination where the current asphalt and landowner's landscaping were located. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Peazce regazding pedestrian and bicycle safety on the 26-foot wide street, Mr. Jost replied that it would allow for two 13-foot wide lanes. He noted that bicycle lanes were not typically striped in residential neighborhoods, and he did not believe that would be a problem on this street. If it did become an issue, a bike lane would require asix-foot wide lane, which would not leave enough width on the street. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Fox regazding a bike lane on only one side, Mr. Jost believed that would not be desirable. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Fox regarding whether the Municipal Code prohibited bike riding on a sidewalk, Mr. Jost replied it was his experience that was not correct and that bikes can use a sidewalk. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 10, 2006 Page 10 of 19