Laserfiche WebLink
MI:NIITES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MARCH 11, 2004 <br />ROAD R-2 The City Plam~er agreed that Code requirements are met including the <br />Shoreland Ordinance. He noted, however, that given the complex legal <br />descriptions and the fact that part of the property is Ton~ens and part is <br />Abstract, the County may require the property to be platted. <br />Duray recommended approval of the Property Division to subdivide 601 <br />East County Road B-2 into two single-family lots as requested by Mary <br />Forbes contingent upon compliance with the reconvnendations of the City <br />Planner. <br />Motion seconded by Rheawne. <br />Motion carried 5 - 0. <br />TOWNOFFTCE The City Planner reported that at the direction of the Council he has <br />PARKING reviewed the parking requirements for townoffice projects, and finds <br />REQUIREMENTS those standards to be adequate. The Planner asked the Commission if they <br />have had a chance to observe the pa~icing at the townoffice projects within <br />the City. <br />Barraclough reported that he has looked at the sites. While he noted that <br />parking gets crowded at times at the Tacheny Townoffices, the parking <br />seems to be working and he has not observed airy on-street parking. <br />Barraclough stated that his concern was the need for sharp turning <br />movements into the parking spaces a~t the Blacktern project that are closest <br />to the entrance drive. <br />Duray and ~I{eis indicated that they did not observe any parking problems <br />at the existing townoffice projects. <br />Rheaume indicated that given the majority of the townoffice units are <br />owner-occupied, businesses will not turn over quickly in these projects <br />and uses will be longer-term than uses in rental space. Rheaume stated <br />that he did not observe any parking problems at the townoffice projects. <br />SALE OF The City Planner indicated that the Cowrcil is seeking input from the <br />COUNTY Planning Commission ou the potential sale of the County Road B <br />ROAD B property. <br />PROPERTY <br />ICeis indicated that he did not see a problem with the sale of the property <br />and development of the site consistent with the zoning in the area. Keis <br />agreed that the location was not the best for aPublic Works garage. <br />-5- <br />