Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the The Gates Of St John Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Plan Commission defers The Gates of St. John primary plat after engineering review and weeks of public comment
Summary
The St. John Plan Commission closed the public hearing for The Gates of St. John primary plat and voted unanimously to defer final action to the May 21 meeting (and to place the item on the May 7 study session) after staff and neighbors raised outstanding engineering, access and density concerns.
The St. John Plan Commission on April 16 closed the public hearing on The Gates of St. John primary plat and voted to defer action until the commission's May 21 meeting; the application will also appear on the May 7 study session.
The commission deferred after planning staff said an engineering review produced 38 outstanding comments that need resolution and after more than a dozen nearby residents raised concerns about density, road access, drainage and impacts on schools.
Applicant representative Steve said the primary plat as shown would not change and requested a one‑month deferral so engineers could address technical comments; Ashley Abernathy, planning staff, told the commission, “There is a compiled list of a grand total of 38 engineering comments that need to be addressed,” and that most other staff comments (police, fire and internal staff review) had already been resolved.
During the public hearing, residents urged changes or clearer disclosure about the development. Doug Blocker, of 10591 Juniper Lane, questioned lot sizes, setbacks and infrastructure costs and told commissioners the town had given similar developers approvals in the past: “Mr. Lawton wanted 120. The town gave it to him,” Blocker said, arguing past approvals had allowed denser development and public infrastructure expense. Joyce Dittman said she was concerned the plan would put “over 600 housing units” on roughly 100 acres and that two access points would be inadequate; Paul Sikora and other nearby homeowners cited runoff and potential flooding into existing ditches.
The applicant described the site plan in broad terms: age‑restricted single‑family homes are proposed on the north side (phases 1 and 3), non‑age‑restricted single‑family homes on the south (phase 2), and townhome buildings in a central area. Staff and the applicant told the commission the plan was submitted in accordance with an annexation agreement approved by the town council during annexation of the property; Mr. Kille (applicant representative) said the annexation documents govern the number of lots, setbacks and unit types and are on file with the town.
Commissioners asked technical questions about lot widths and access. The applicant said lot widths for attached/townhome lots would range roughly from 50 to 100 feet, with 50‑foot lots typically containing four attached units and 100‑foot lots containing about eight; the plan includes stub streets to the east and west to allow future connections. The applicant also said the water system in the development will be looped and that a lift station would collect and pump sanitary flow to the south.
Planning staff advised the public that the hearing had been properly noticed and that deferral would not require re‑advertisement. After discussion, Plan Commission member John Gill moved to close the hearing and defer the item to the May 21 regular meeting and to place it on the May 7 study session; the motion passed unanimously.
Next steps: the applicant must respond to the engineering comments identified by McAlpine Consulting and coordinate final engineering submittals. The commission will reconsider the primary plat at the May 21 meeting (and review technical work at the May 7 study session).
