Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Planning Commission <br />October 10, 2006. <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />Attached as Exhibit B is a complete copy of the ~ouncil's findings on <br />Goal 12. <br /> <br />Following the September 19, 2006 discussion, it was specifically <br />determined by the Commission that a similar trip generation analysis <br />would suffice for this application to redesignate and rezone a 1.7 -acre <br />parcel. Attached as Exhibit C is the trip generation analysis of Tom R. <br />Lancaster, PE, of Lancaster Engineering. That analysis shows the <br />potential increase of 198 daily trips. It would seem that if the staff <br />and City Council could conclude in the courthouse redesignation that <br />an increase of 10,775 daily trips would not have a significant effect on <br />a transportation facility, it is reasonable to conclude that 198 trips 'will <br />not have that effect. <br /> <br />The staff has previously indicated positive findings on all other goals <br />and criteria. If, in spite of clear policy direction to redesignate and <br />rezone this parcel, further analysis is necessary, that has now been <br />provided and we ask that the Planning Commission recommend <br />approval of the Metro Plan amendment and zone change. <br /> <br /> <br />Jca <br />cc: Client (w / att) <br />Emily Jerome (w / att) <br /> <br />Attachments: <br /> <br />Exhibit A <br />Exhibit B <br />Exhibit C <br /> <br />Memorandum from Gary McNeel, June 18, 2003 <br />City Council findings, Goal 12 <br />Trip Generation Analysis, Tom Lancaster, October <br />6,2006 <br />