Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1988-09-13 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MINUTES SEPTEMBER 13, 1988 Present: Chairperson S. Blumenthal, J. Daley, S. Jackson, M. Sampson, A. Yale, and P. Mazzarella Absent: T. Cookingham The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Blumenthal at 7 :35 p.m. The first item addressed by the Board was the Theory Center. The UDC public hearing was held on August 25 at which time the public came to comment on the project. Chair Blumenthal gave comments at the public hearing which stated that the current project design is much better than the original design. Chair Blumenthal went on to describe some of the comments, both negative and positive, presented by the public at the UDC public hearing. Board member Yale commented that the environmental analysis is very superficial in many respects, and the document is not a complete, realistic look at the effects the Theory Center will have. The Board decided on certain mitigating measures to suggest. They would like to establish a contract limit line. There needs to be strong language in the contract to provide for the protection of plant life in the surrounding area. In addition, the run-off of water and siltation needs to be controlled during construction. The language of the contract must specify these types of protective measures so that contractors can be held responsible. The Board also suggested the establishment of a remote staging area for any equipment associated with construction of the project so that trucks, etc . will enter and leave the campus in an organized fashion. The second issue addressed by the Board was the West Hill master plan. It was noted that the City may be looking into hiring a consultant to assist with the West Hill Plan. A plan must be developed for streets and utilities that works in terms of good engineering standards . West Hill residents have commented that they do not want through traffic and they do not want to generate any traffic . The first step is getting good information; getting a good base map. A topographical map will be needed to plan and begin the project. They need to respond to neighborhood wants and develop a new neighborhood character. Traffic impacts, pedestrian impacts, etc. , must be addressed. Right now, the project is at a conceptual stage. The project is going to require a detailed, well thought out plan which will have to be presented to the people for their input in its development. A Board member voiced concern that the City may "miss the boat" , and contractors may not want to wait until a new master plan is completed. Materials have been gathered to begin the work on the master plan. Consultants may be hired to assist planning staff in completing the design of the master plan. Question was raised as to whether or not the West Hill master plan issue could be raised on the priority list for the Planning staff so that it could be given more of their time. A West Hill resident was present in the audience to add comment that the staff and citizens should work together to lay the groundwork for a consultant who may be hired. He asked if traffic volume was being monitored. Paul Mazzarella responded that data about existing traffic conditions is being gathered and computer simulations will give possible results . The resident in the audience wants counts on various streets to be made because perceptions of traffic volume can be very deceiving. The Board discussed the fact that the project would be a two-track process . The first being the development of street systems in relationship to the subdivisions that are now being considered. The second track will be the development of new regional streets and bridges which will serve the community as a whole more efficiently. Chair Blumenthal stated that she wants the idea for the West Hill master plan to be defined, as well as what will be done with the entire West Hill and Southwest area. The biggest issue in this project will be that of through streets . The Board could help to define the role citizen participation is going to play. To date, the relationship between the City and the neighborhood has been vague. Board members voiced concern that neighborhood residents need to be educated concerning cluster housing. Paul Mazzarella has begun drafting guidelines concerning the development of cluster housing; they are currently being reviewed by Common Council. The Board proceeded to the next agenda item to be covered- Emergency Planning Priorities . It was noted that the Planning and Development Committee is working on the Site Plan Review Ordinance and that they probably will not complete that review before October. The proposed R-2 zone was discussed. The Board would like to see that development density be tied to the number of bedrooms rather than the number of dwelling units . They also noted that this concept could also be applied to the other zoning districts to control density. The Board discussed mitigating measure which could be used to lower the impacts of commercial development next to residential zones, as well as changing the zoning ordinances to avoid this problem or limiting uses to certain zones . The discussion of problems with the R-3 zones between C&O and P&D Committee resulted in the opinion that nearly all R-3 zones need to be redefined so that density is lowered and other areas need to be redefined and not even be R-3 zones anymore. Some R-2 and R-3 ' s which touch should be rezoned so there is a transitional area between them. Gathering enough data to revise the residential parking requirements could be a very time consuming job. Household surveys may be the most effective method of getting information concerning the number of cars per household. Changes recommended by Board: change density requirements in R-3 zones (how much should R-3 density be reduced and by which manipulation of zoning ordinances) ; having decided density of R-3, which areas that are now R-3 should be changed to R-2C or lower. The Board added that the Committee is welcome to bring their own ideas on solving this matter. The final matter discussed by the Board was site plan review criteria. They determined that the developer must understand that there are certain expectations concerning items such as landscaping and drainage standards . In looking at the Port Chester ordinances, the Board felt that just the mention of certain expectations brought the developer to an awareness that the city will be looking at those things during site plan review. Staff recommendation was to have the ordinances adopted and then, at a later date, implement the specific standards . A motion was made by Andrew Yale to recommend to Council that the site plan ordinance be passed without specific site plan standards but those standards or guidelines be considered after the ordinance has been in effect for a year. Motion was seconded by M. Sampson. Vote 2-2 . The Planning & Development Board meeting was adjourned at 10 : 00 P.M.