Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission backs 57‑unit Anderson Lane specific plan after traffic, stream concerns
Summary
The Planning Commission approved a specific plan to allow 57 multifamily units on Anderson Lane, accepting staff conditions and the applicant’s commitment to a traffic study; neighbors urged stronger traffic mitigation and raised environmental concerns about an unmapped spring-fed stream.
The Planning Commission on March 26 recommended approval of a specific plan to permit 57 multifamily residential units on three parcels along Anderson Lane, adopting staff’s recommendation to approve with conditions.
Planning presenter Jeremiah said the SP would allow two- and three‑story townhome-style units at a density of about 14 units per acre, with a 10‑foot landscape buffer at some property edges and a proposed open space around a previously unmapped spring-fed stream. Staff found the plan consistent with the neighborhood-evolving T4 policy and recommended approval with conditions including sidewalk and landscape commitments.
At the public hearing, nearby residents pressed the commission on traffic and safety. "The traffic is so absolutely awful there," said Paul Abear, a nearby homeowner, who said he often cannot leave his driveway during peak times. Resident Jeremiah Greg said the community had repeatedly requested a traffic study before the SP decision.
The applicant’s representative said neighborhood concerns informed several revisions. An applicant who identified himself as Anthony told the commission the team had worked with staff and Council Member Hancock and asked for a recommendation to council. Engineer Michael Garrian said the team self‑identified a spring-fed stream on the site that had not been mapped and described a gated hammerhead emergency access as a less intrusive alternative to a full cul‑de‑sac to preserve the stream buffer.
In rebuttal the applicant committed to placing a traffic study requirement in the SP: "We did commit to a traffic study. We were not required to do that, but we wanted to make absolutely sure we're putting it on the record today that we are committing to it," the applicant said.
Council Member Hancock told the commission she supported the SP recommendation but reiterated community concerns about school‑hour congestion and the stream: she said she has scheduled a state zoologist to evaluate the stream for protected species and noted that a traffic study must be completed before final site‑plan approval.
Commissioners discussed buffering, stormwater and the traffic study commitment. Commissioner Henley moved to accept staff’s recommendation to approve with conditions; the motion was seconded and passed. The commission recorded the approval and will forward its recommendation to council.
Next steps: the applicant must satisfy the conditions outlined in staff’s memo, complete any required studies (including the traffic analysis), and carry those commitments into the final site‑plan review and council consideration.
