HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-29-23 Public Comment - P. Lundin - Canyon Gate CommentsFrom:Paul
To:Agenda
Subject:Canyon Gate Comments
Date:Wednesday, March 29, 2023 11:18:10 PM
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.
These comments pertain to the review of the Canyon Gate monstrosity proposed in the north
east corridor.
This development has continually ignored the rightful and justified comments and concerns ofneighbors, citizens and taxpayers and continues to put a sole developer's desires above
neighborhood safety, livability and accessibility.
This project and the city's engagement around it show a severe lack of democratic process,ignoring the majority of residents in the area. I would ask that the city invoke its authority
under Section 38.200.010 to prevent adverse impacts to adjacent subdivision developments.
Specifically, the City should require revision of the amount of greenspace to be consistentwith and adjacent to the existing neighborhoods (not on bridger drive) and aligned with city
requirements for greenspace. No pay in lieu should be allowed here.
The development should be audited for the impacts on urban hot spot development on nativewildlife due to the nature of the buildings and parking. There should also be a comprehensive
snow management plan which does not impact adjacent neighbors.
The proposed residences and commercial space in the plat plan should be reduced and thenumber of parking spaces allocated should account for the usage intended, it is not acceptable
to push retail parking or traffic onto existing residential streets which are often full of childrenplaying and riding bikes (as the neighborhood wants it). If this path is pursued all adjacent
residential streets should be permitted parking only for residents to avoid impacts in alreadyfrequently congested areas along northview and midfield due to lack of available parking. This
intersection has frequently become impassable due to snow and parking on all corners for thepast several years and is adjacent to a proposed ingress/egress point of the development which
will encourage visitors to park on residential streets in the area.
The development will double the number of residents in the area and also seeks to attractshoppers to a regional location but puts the burden of this increase on nearby neighbors and
does NOTHING to account for this itself, thus decreasing the quality of life, livability andsafety of the neighborhood.
The City should also require as a condition of approval that the Applicant make the above
adjustments to their plans 1. Greenspace moved to face existing residential neighborhoods notalong bridger & storymill 2. the number of units and retail space or amount of parking
allocated must change. 3. funds for future emergency response services, including a policedepartment annex in the development.