Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee flags Mercer Mountain plan over private road, drainage and trailhead access
Summary
Members raised concerns that the Mercer Mountain development would privatize the developer road, complicate public access to the trailhead, and could alter historic drainage channels; they recommended accepting staff redlines and reserving 2016-designated trailhead spaces while city engineers review drainage.
Committee members spent significant time on the Mercer Mountain development plan, focusing on conflicts where the developer's road becomes private and whether a public easement is required to preserve trail access. S1 summarized the problem: the developer's plan makes the road "private from this point on" which could prevent public access to the city's trailhead unless an easement is negotiated.
The group also voiced concern about drainage and erosion risks if large quantities of fill are placed on the slope. "One of my biggest concerns is that the impacts to existing drainage channel due to exceeding drainage from other drainage waste," S1 said, urging that city engineers review historic flows and detention basins. Staff confirmed engineers are reviewing those flows; the committee recommended accepting the park redlines for developer materials but also recommended the city preserve the 2016 trailhead location and require erosion control language in agreements. The motion to accept the redlines and reserve the 2016 trailhead locations was recorded by the committee and will be forwarded to council as part of the park's recommendation package.
