PC 070908 - Laserfiche WebLink

disappear at the. He noted that if residents wanted to walk, the thought was that there would be some portion of sidewalk, but given it was at an end of a cul-de- sac, staff did not believe this would put them at risk. Commissioner Fox noted that the original project had 300 homes when it was referended, and with the 110 units, it would go up to 301 homes. Mr. Otto said the original project had 363 approved units. This development would add 110 more to it. He stated that the PUD approval for the original Ironwood development indicated the density for the site as Medium Density Residential, which could be between two to eight units per acre; the proposed project would be at 4.8 units per acre. Chair Blank referred to the Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA), stating the main access is through Reimers Drive. He noted that there is an EVA on Sandstone Court and requested confirmation that the EVA on Court F is for internal use only. He questioned the purpose of the EVA off of the Operations Service Center (OSC). Mr. Otto replied that before the Ironwood project was developed, the OSC originally had an EVA connection along its western side. He explained that as part of its approval, Ponderosa Homes was required to provide a different connection along the north to the future Reimers Drive extension. He noted that even if Reimers Drive is extended, the developer is still obligated to provide an EVA connection for the City along the northern part of the OSC. Chair Blank referred to the Negative Declaration and Land Use Planning item and staff's determination that gating the project would not divide it from the community. He referred to Item B, the conflict with the applicable land use plan including but not limited to the General Plan, and noted that it appears to be in conflict and did not understand how this would have no impact if the General Plan discourages gated communities. Mr. Otto clarified that the language used in the General Plan is "discourages" and does not actually prohibit gated communities. He added that there is some flexibility for a gated community to be approved. Commissioner Narum questioned the requirement by the City for the streets to be 36 feet wide, as the streets in the development next door are only 28 feet wide. She also questioned why there were not sidewalks throughout the development, as the community would be active and felt there would be some sort of trade-off for adding sidewalks and reducing street widths. She stated that she felt this also tied to storm water runoff and being green. Traffic Engineer Mike Tassano stated that when the City designs a roadway; the Fire Department requires 20 feet of clear space on any roadway. He indicated that he needs to provide eight feet of parking, so in the 28-foot example, there is an eight-foot parking on one side two 10-foot travel lanes, which gives the 20 feet of clear space for the Fire Department. He added that similarly, with 36-foot roadways, there are two eight feet of parking on either side and ten feet of travel PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 9, 2008 Page 10 of 39