Agenda - 06-03-2008-5b5d - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

i~~ Question 6 Due to the small size, lack of scale, and very conceptual nature of the diagram presented, it is difficult to ;' read from the proposed "Comprehensive Buffer and Landscape Plan" (inserted between pgs 38 & 39 of the package) whether or not the applicant is requesting that up to 60% of what appears to be an existing riparian buffer (and existing MTC land use buffer) will be removed next to I40/85 so that there can be increased "visibility" of the tenants of the mall from the Interstate. Since this is a request by the applicant to Waive existing performance standards, please provide, for clarification, a scaled plan (at a scale that clearly illustrates this area of the site) showing the intended extent of disturbance to the existing MTC and required riparian buffers... showing the actual extent of the proposed area of the buffer to be removed, the existing stream location, the location of the proposed roads, stormwater pond(s), and other impervious surfaces (i.e. parking lots) in the area. STAFF RESPONSE: The Ordinance does not require the submission of a site plan detailing the physical nature or impact of the proposed `design solution'. This detail, for the most part, is contained within their application. If the County does not believe sufficient justification is available to approve a proposed `design solution' then it is denied and the applicable EDD Design standards is required to be complied with. Question 7 Does the pedestrian `wallcability plan" include any provisions for a safe means of pedestrian circulation along and across Buckhorn and West Ten roads between this proposed development and its- neighbors (present or future neighbors)? "~ STAFF RESPONSE: The `walkability plan' does not indicate how pedestrian will access the property by crossing Buclchorn or West Ten Road. The plan does indicate sidewallts along the boundaries of the property along both roadways to facilitate pedestrian access. We could request crosswalks and street crossing devices to facilitate ofF site pedestrian access but the developer cannot be made to install sidewallcs across either Buclchorn or West Ten Roads. Question 8 As described in the 2/25/08 QPH package, page 10, a County Development Advisory Committee (DAC) met to review and assess the project application. Was anyone from ERCD staff included in this review team? STAFF RESPONSE: Yes, Mr. Rich Shaw is a member of the DAC review team and was copies on all information concerning the application.