Laserfiche WebLink
<br />on-street parking areas along Cameron Avenue were provided at the neighbors' request. The <br />two-story homes were substantially revised to minimize the number of windows looking over the <br />rear yard to one bonus room window. She displayed the various home designs and described <br />their major features. <br /> <br />In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Fox regarding whether the Principal of the nearby <br />school had been consulted regarding removing the sidewalk, Ms. Hardy replied that she had not <br />conducted those discussions. She noted that the neighbors had favored the "feathering" of <br />density for the Mohr/Martin area. <br /> <br />Joe Fitzgerald, 3752 Trenery Drive, noted that he had sent an e-mail to Marion Pavan following <br />the neighborhood meeting. He and his wife were in support of the development and were <br />impressed by Ponderosa's overall responsiveness in their neighborhood outreach. He added that <br />his home directly abutted the development and believed that the 25-home option was appealing. <br />He believed the home size and density fit well with the neighborhood, as did the architecture. <br /> <br />Gregory Ketell, 3611 Cameron Avenue, noted that his house would be negatively affected by the <br />sidewalk. He noted that the neighbors, mostly residents of Palmer Drive, were generally in favor <br />of the sidewalk for safety reasons. He noted that an alternative route (Palmer Drive to Head <br />Way, Kamp Drive, Glen Isle Avenue, Newton Way to the school) was 0.71 miles, and was <br />available for the greater safety for their children. He noted that the sidewalk issue had been <br />previously argued and resolved, and it was decided that it was not a necessary requirement, even <br />when the school was put in. He believed the law stated that bicycles should be ridden on the <br />road, not the sidewalk. He expressed concern that building a sidewalk would result in eight feet <br />of his property being removed, along with five heritage pine trees. He would also lose all of his <br />privacy screening from the neighbors' lot as well as the irrigation on that side ofthe lot. He was <br />very concerned about the possible use of eminent domain being used to seize his property. <br /> <br />In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Fox whether it would be possible to reduce the street <br />width from 28 feet to 24 feet along the section of street to accommodate a sidewalk, Mr. Ketell <br />replied that was already very narrow and the neighbors would not be able to back out or drive <br />through with their boats or motor homes. He noted that they were a rural neighborhood and <br />added that a straight concrete sidewalk would remove that rural character. <br /> <br />Mr. Grubstick, City Engineer, noted that the street width could be reduced to from 28 feet to <br />24 feet and added that there was an additional 2.5 to 3 feet ofright-of-way easement beyond the <br />existing street width. He concurred with Mr. Ketell's opinion that the straight sidewalk would <br />not be able to meander for a rural feel. The fire trucks would be able to navigate a 24- foot-wide <br />street. <br /> <br />Matt Lawer, 3750 Cameron Avenue, noted that he was directly impacted by the project and <br />would like significant consideration to be taken with their concerns. He displayed the site and <br />would like the U-shaped entrance to be reconfigured to another path that would go through as <br />displayed. He did not want a two-way or four-way intersection to impact his home. He was very <br />concerned about the impact of the street design and sidewalks on his quality of life. <br /> <br />EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, March 29, 2006 <br /> <br />Page 2 of6 <br />