HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic CommentJANISCH Amy C
From:
FLOCK Gabriel
Sent:
Monday, February 23, 2015 10:54 AM
To:
'Alice and Ross'
Cc:
SMITH Deanna N; GILLESPIE Scott N; STARK Donna L; COGBURN Jordan D; BERG-JOHANSEN
Erik
Subject:
RE: PDT 15-001 Chamotee Trails
Thanks for the email, Ross. I appreciate being kept in the loop on your concerns and I'm copying this to other staff that will be
involved the completeness review process. We'll surely be in touch as the process moves forward. GF
From: Alice and Ross [mailto:ross-alice@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 10:35 AM
To: FLOCK Gabriel
Subject: PDT 15-001 Chamotee Trails
Good morning, Gabe.
This is a personal e-mail, sent as a City resident. I am not representing anyone in this matter; I am only
appearing in my individual capacity.
I have an interest in the newly filed Chamotee Trails PUD application. I suspect I will be appearing
throughout this proceeding.
I am not sure who you will be putting on this file, so I thought I would send you this initial e-mail. I have some
thoughts on the completeness review process.
I suspect y'all will find other deficiencies in the application, but I see three off the bat.
1) The application does not demonstrate the application is for needed housing as defined by state law. (You
and I will probably disagree on this point, but I still fail to see where the City has made the determination, as
defined "by state law", where all housing is needed housing. For instance, there is no indication of the
income level this housing is intended to appeal to a necessary element for any needed housing analysis.)
2) The application has not submitted the 5' interval map for slope analysis.
3) The application has not submitted any type of tree plan that would support a finding that the development
will "insure maximum preservation of existing vegetation."
I also will point out to you the applicant mentioned at the neighborhood meeting that public works directed
them to not seek any increase in paving width for W. Amazon, to use a pressure sewer system that runs up
Foxboro Lane rather than a gravity system that runs down W. Amazon, and to not propose sidewalks for W.
Amazon. Each of these directives were made by public works without any clear and objective criteria let
alone any documentation that is included in the application.
I know the completeness review process is a staff process, but I thought I would offer these thoughts in case
they are helpful.
I hope all is well with you.
-Ross
Ross Williamson
875 Foxboro Ln