Laserfiche WebLink
4IINU'CS''~ i <br />Ci.ty Counci.l. <br />~]ov, 22.y ].933 <br />Johnson <br />Subcli.vis:ian <br />PUD (ConC.) <br />t4rs. Scal.ze pointed out that the Planni.n~ Cornmi.ssioi~i recommended <br />epproval of'. the proposal. <br />Mr. }.'ol.z reported th~xt: he has read the Ylanner's Reporr and i.ndicated <br />thati tlie Planner stsiCes t_hat ~ hydrant must be s•ritl~in 750 £e~~~t of: <br />Che ora.rehouse ancl, cheref:ore, a hydranE~. is reqai.r.ed, Nlr. 'fblz <br />pointed out that the pr.~esent. hqdr.•ant is 24~7 feee from the warehouse, <br />'Phe I;n;i.neer repl.i.ed tnat thi.s i.s accenCable i.f the hydrani: is wi.Chi.n <br />250 feeC. <br />'Che Planrier. reporCed that th~is recomraendati.on caroe ~rom the 77~ire <br />T,s(arshal.l and Tire Departrnent and they *.aere al.so concerned a6out <br />Ckie b7.odced access to the warehouse by a guard rail.. 'CY~e Pl.anner <br />sut;gested t1~at the Fi.re Department rev:i~w this item. <br />Mr. I'olz reported thaC tP~e plnnner. i.s proposin~ a?_4 fooC access to <br />Che w~rehouse bet~aeen the laundramat and ofl:ice bu:ildi.ng< Tkie <br />latmdramat wou).d 7.9.Ice its present: parkin~ t.o remain, 'Lhere,Eore, <br />P1r. Fol.z proposecl that the nccess be between the off:i.ce and <br />apartment bu~il.ci.i.ng as it is present7.y. Therc i.s present:ly 1.6 feet. <br />in th:i.s area, l.iowever, .~ir. Johnson is wi.ll:i.ng to dedicat~ 24 £eet <br />if ~i.t: :i.s necessary. <br />Mr. Po1z esplai.ned the uC~,Ll.f.t:i.es on the groperty and the drain~ge. <br />Mrs. Scal.ze ziske:d :i.f. the p1aC should contai.n t}~~e d~riveway casemant <br />for the warehouse, ~?7r, T'olz replied that th:is i.s a pri.vate easement <br />and camioC be recorded on a~lxito <br />T'he Pl.anner staGed tl'~at driveway easements oiould bc in the form of <br />~ written agreement< <br />?4r. Pol.r commented that they do not want to dedi.cate the access <br />as a public streeC. <br />Mrs. Nardini ~islced ifi any of tl;ie btr.ildings would Y~ave to be spr:i.nlclered. <br />9'iie Planner re;pli.ed that there i.s no change :in d~e buildings. Thi.s <br />i.s a subdi.vi.si.on on1y. <br />i~irs, Scal.ze poi.nted ouC that the pr.operty would be subject: to a <br />park char;e as it ~is a subdivi.sion. Scal.ze reported Chat: the park <br />charge would be 5% of the raw val.ue of T.he properC.y. Scal.ze poinY:ed <br />out that: this is what the Ci.ty did :i.n tize case of. Gervais Cr.eelc. <br />P4r. Hanson aslced iS Che removal. of: t.hc ;uard rail wou7.d prescnt a <br />problem. Mr, Po7.r repli.ed thaC iC would not. <br />Mr, Fahey aslccd why the 1?lanner recommende[l that. t:he warehouse access <br />be to the sout:l~. The Yl.anner. reE~l.:ied that the onl.y reason for this <br />was because of. Che wiclth. 'fhe PLanner stat:ed thz~t iI the access to <br />Page -4- <br />