Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Integra Homes PUD Report <br />July 6, 2005 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />Access and Circulation: <br />Many residents and some members of the Planning Commission have expressed some <br />concern about there being only one access into the project. Other residents (living on Grove <br />land Road) expressed opposition to a second access routing additional traffic onto their <br />street. The applicants reviewed all options and determined that alternative secondary access <br />points were not possible. From a traffic management and public safety perspective, there <br />are no issues with one access point serving 21 dwelling units. <br /> <br />Additional Planning Requests: <br />If the proposed development receives approval of the general concept plan, it will move to <br />the development stage of the PUD, at which time the applicant will also apply for a major <br />subdivision and development review. The final stage of the PUD process is the <br />administrative approval. <br /> <br />Public Comment: <br />Several property owners contacted Staff to voice concerns about the proposed development. <br />Some residents felt that the development was too intense for the area it would be occupying. <br />Two residents commented that they felt the layout is poor and causes privacy issues, <br />specifically because several of the units would be facing the existing neighbor’s backyards. <br />In most developments, the front of the home does not face the backyard of another. In order <br />to remedy this, the applicant could consider making all the townhouse units face the <br />north/south street, which would eliminate the issue for the most part. In addition, some <br />residents voiced a concern regarding the loss of trees and the need for screening of some <br />type between the new development and the existing neighborhood. One neighbor stated <br />that he would prefer a privacy fence as screening. In addition, some neighbors commented <br />that they felt County Road 10 should be developed with commercial uses instead of <br />residential, as it is the main business district in the City. <br /> <br />Recommendation: <br /> <br />Discuss the general concept plan for the proposed development. No revisions or <br />modifications to the Integra PUD were provided to staff for review and the deadline for action <br />is approaching. Because of the concerns raised at the May 4, 2005 public hearing and due <br />to the issues raised by the Commission, staff is recommending the Commission adopt a <br />resolution recommending denial of the Integra General Concept PUD proposal. Resolution <br />796-05 is available for the Commission’s action. <br /> <br />Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Jim Ericson <br />Community Development Director <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />