CCMIN100306 - Laserfiche WebLink

In response to Council question, staff indicated the Council, with the PUD in front of them now, could interpret that there is not an exemption from providing an amenity and could require an amenity or could say they wanted it developed at the mid-point density. Staff indicated there is no question that the Council is not required to approve a project at the highest possible density under the General Plan, Council always has that discretion. The better reading of the record is that no amenity is required, but staff can't say categorically that the Council can't require it. The City Manager added that it is implicit in the record that that was the intent of the Planning Commission, which is certainly reflected in the two dissenting votes of the commissioners at the time. In Ordinance 1709, the third whereas talks about how the City Council received the Planning Commission's recommendations for approval of the prezoning. Council discussion ensued regarding when this process actually started (which was approximately 9 months ago) and the available parking width on Cameron Avenue. It was noted there were no stop signs planned for Cameron Avenue. Traffic patterns and speed limits were discussed, as well as the need to look at updating the city's traffic fees. The need for additional crosswalk design was also noted. Discussion also ensued regarding sidewalk width on Cameron and street width possibilities. Mayor Hosterman opened the public hearing. Pamela Hardy, representing Ponderosa Homes, addressed Council in support of the proposed project and thanked staff for their work and analysis. She also thanked the neighbors for their participation. She went over the background and public process the project has been through and gave an extensive overview of the project, project details, traffic analysis, circulation, densities, etc. Explaining the proposal in further detail and going over some of what had already been stated by staff in the staff presentation, she urged Council to support the PUD. In response to Council question it was noted that in the conditions of approval, there is flexibility for the potential of a masonry wall or an enhanced wood fence to wrap at the corner on lots 4 and 19. Bill Selway, on behalf of Mel and Carol Lehman, read a letter into the record from the Lehman's explaining the history of their property and supports the proposed project. Kathryn Selway addressed the Council commenting on the history of the Moore/Martin area. She commented on how other developers have not been considerate of surrounding homeowners and added that Ponderosa Homes has a wonderful reputation in that regard. She noted the neighbors that have approached her have been very supportive and appreciative of how Ponderosa has worked with them. Kelly Cousins referenced a letter dated September. 29, 2006, endorsed by a number of neighbors, with concerns regarding unresolved issues such as traffic, safety, the proposed density, how the houses look relative to the property and the adjacent Ponderosa development. She indicated she feels there needs to be an additional City Council Minutes 11 October 3, 2006