Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission removes traffic review comments from Ponderosa master plan after developer objection
Summary
The commission voted to remove traffic department comments 3–14 from the Ponderosa master plan after the applicant's representative said those comments were in error and not applicable to a lot‑line adjustment; commissioners asked that traffic staff attend future meetings.
Developers and the Planning & Zoning Commission debated whether traffic‑engineering comments belong on a master plan before the design/plat stage, and the commission voted to remove most traffic comments from the Ponderosa master plan.
At the session Orlando Navarro spoke for the record about the Ponderosa master plan revision, which updates lot configurations across residential, commercial, multi‑family and industrial designations. He said the submittal merely changed lot lines and that traffic comments placed in the staff packet (including a proposed traffic impact analysis) were inappropriate for a master plan and appeared to have been added by cut‑and‑paste.
“...we're just doing lot line similar to what the engineer before us did. They just changed lot line so there's no comments,” Orlando Navarro said, arguing there was no ordinance requiring a traffic impact analysis at the master‑plan stage.
Commissioners and staff discussed internal coordination; staff said the traffic comments are typically for detailed engineering and plat submittals rather than conceptual master plans. Commissioners expressed frustration that traffic and other departments often do not attend commission meetings to explain the rationale for comments and asked staff to relay a request to city management and the traffic department head to attend. One commissioner suggested moving meetings to midday to improve departmental attendance.
A motion was made and amended to remove traffic comments numbered three through 14 while retaining traffic items one and two and fire department comments; the amendment was accepted and the motion carried by voice vote.
