Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-20-23 Public Comment - D. Egnatz - Shady Glen #22294From:Diane Sheehan Egnatz To:Agenda Subject:Shady Glen #22294 Date:Monday, March 20, 2023 9:33:38 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Commissioners, I am writing to comment on the Shade Glen PUD, Project # 22294. My comments echo many of the other public comments I’ve read. I think it’s important to note that all these comments and issues could be resolved by fewer residences in this area. There is always a speculative nature in buying land, especially land close to known waterways, and it’s not the City’s responsibility to relax requirements so that the landowner can get more profit out of the site. Some lots just cannot or should not be built to maximum zoned density. Wetlands Setbacks: My biggest concern on this development is the relaxation of the wetland setbacks. This site is a sensitive area and already subject to flooding. Additional building and impervious surfaces both from this development and others in the surrounding area will only cause further stress on this wetland. In reviewing the site in close detail, turning the lots sideways and reducing by 2-3 will allow for the full required setback. If the city truly feels that 14 single family homes is necessary in this area, I’d suggest looking at a more creative solution. A relaxation of the maximum building area vs lot size to allow for the same number of smaller lots outside of the 50’ setback and 100year flood plain. The developer would have much smaller lots to sell but being surrounded by wetlands and parks would offset that. While I applaud the developer for offering 2 affordable units in this development, those two units can still be provided while adhering to setback requirements. As an incentive to allow the development 2 units are not worth relaxing our environmental or health and safety standards. Second Emergency Access Driveway: I think this solution is a positive one if there truly is no way to connect onto Boylan Rd. If the dual-use emergency access pathway is approved, it is in the best interest of health and safety to require this access to be cleared of snow, at all times. This needs to be a written binding agreement that is enforceable by the city. As we’ve all seen, these access points typical become large snow mounds, both limiting the useability as a pathway and cancelling the intent of this emergency access point. Thank you for considering my comments. -Diane Egnatz 1268 Boylan Road -- Diane Sheehan Egnatz339-206-4459