Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />AUGUST 8, 2002 <br />statements from the Planning Commission and the City Council that no <br />variances would be granted as part of the development of this property, <br />road access has been provided to Viking Drive. <br />1<eis indicated that he feels the road connection to Viking Drive was a <br />good thing from a planning perspective. <br />Roycrafl felt that action on the preliminary plat should be tabled and that a <br />decision cam~ot he made until the Williams Pipeline review is completed. <br />Keis agreed the plat should be tabled, and asked if the Commission had <br />any direction for the developers on other issues. Keis indicated his <br />preference fora 30 foot front yard setback rather than the 20 feet shown <br />on Uie plat. <br />13arraclough stated that he supported the plat as modified in response to <br />the City Flannel's and City Engineer's recommendations, but agreed that <br />Williams Pipeline should review and respond to the plat prior to action by <br />the Planning Commission. <br />Duray indicated that he was opposed to the development of this property <br />when the Commission reviewed the concept development in 1999, and he <br />is still opposed to the develol,~ment of this property. Duray indicated that <br />his reasons for opposing the development have to do with the increasing <br />pollution of I_.al<e Gervais. 1-Ie felt that development of this site will <br />desh'oy the ecological balance of the area. <br />Knudsen stated that he shares Duray's concerns about the pollution of <br />Gervais, but felt that the Watershed was responsible for addressing those <br />issues. Knudsen pointed out that the developer has (resented a lot of <br />changes to the preliminary plat this evening. IIc would like to see the <br />preliminary plat redrawn to reflect those changes. Knudsen felt there was <br />a lot of information presented just this evening by the developer, and he <br />was not prepared to vote on the preliminary plat this evening. <br />Gatzl<e agreed with t3arraclough's comments, and indicated that he agreed <br />that action on the preliminary plat should be tabled pending a report fromm <br />Williams Pipeline. <br />In response to Duray's position, I<eis indicated it has been his experience <br />that the AVatershed's regulations are fairly stringent, and he felt they would <br />err on the side of the residents rather than the developer. Therefore, he <br />would support a preliminary plat that met all the criteria of the Watershed. <br />- 14- <br />