SR 06:182 - Laserfiche WebLink

include a path and believed that the developer should share responsibility for the traffic generated. He would like to see a speed table in action before he could support it as a traffic-calming measure; he was concerned about the car noise before and after the speed table. Steve Grimes, 3722 Cameron Avenue, noted that it did not matter to him whether the street was straight or curvilinear. He did not want to see a sidewalk on Cameron Avenue and believed there could be an alternative for children to walk. He did not believe narrowing the street to 26 feet would be a good idea. Shirley Lauer, 2221 Martin, noted that she generally supported the plan as well as giving an additional ten feet of land to the Palmer A venue residents, increasing the size of their backyards. She also liked the new placement and orientation of the new homes. She believed the undergrounding of utilities on Martin Avenue had been overlooked. She noted that the entire Selway property was included in the proposed PUD, and there was about 300 feet of frontage on Martin Avenue. She believed that Ponderosa Homes would pay into a fund because the amount of frontage was less than 600 feet; Ponderosa would prefer to pay into the fund rather than underground the utilities on Martin Avenue. However, Ponderosa Homes agreed with undergrounding in front of the Selway property. She doubted she would see the completion of Martin Avenue in her lifetime. She believed the poles would be a safety hazard to traffic and would like them to be removed. She did not believe they should be allowed to build the last commercial development area without providing minimum infrastructure such as underground utilities. She believed that Ponderosa Homes should be required to underground the utilities in front of the Selway property, north to the end of Martin Avenue and potentially on Trenery Drive as well. In response to an inquiry by Commission Olson regarding PG&E funding the undergrounding process, Mr. Jost replied that they were not interested in funding the undergrounding at this time. A discussion of the technical and economic aspects of the utility undergrounding process ensued related to Rule 20A PG funding, City matching funds, and the City Council prioritization process for public projects. Commissioner Blank questioned whether the Martin Avenue residents would be able to obtain the undergrounding because the Rule 20A funds had already been allocated for City projects for fiscal Year 2005-2006. Greg Jetter, 3618 Cameron Avenue, noted that he and other residents had met with Ponderosa Homes the previous Monday to look at the alternative development plans. He appreciated Ponderosa Home's willingness to make concessions and address their concerns throughout the process. The group's consensus was that Alternative 3 was the best and that it had greater offsets benefiting front yard enhancements, allowing for greater curvature of the road; that would also allow slower speeds and would be in character with the neighborhood. Their consensus was that traffic-calming measures should be implemented and that some mitigation issues be developed, such as the double curve ends of the roads. The neighbors believed that speed tables would be better than speed bumps or stop signs. They believed that a permanent speed-monitoring device would be desirable on Martin A venue. They did not want sidewalks on Cameron A venue, which they believed would endanger bicyclists. He noted that there were more bike riders than pedestrians on that street, and it would be a EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, May 10,2006 Page 3 of8