Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />Planning Commission <br />February 9, 1989 <br />require that part of it be brick and /or that . the <br />landscaping be upgraded on the freeway side in order to <br />keep the aesthetic value. <br />Pedersen asked if the Commission can set up different PUD <br />criteria. <br />DeLonais then stated that he agreed that as the soil is bad <br />and that whatever is done for one will have to be done for <br />all. <br />Bendel stated that the PUD is future oriented. <br />Upon motion by Davison, seconded by Bendel, the Commission <br />approved the Section 6 PUD as recommended by the Planner, <br />and that the PUD be developed by I1 standards on a case by <br />case basis. <br />Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />Motion adopted. <br />I1 District The Planner submitted a report for changes in the <br />Standards I1 District standards regarding the parking area, outdoor <br />storage area and landscaping. It appears that people are <br />storing things on landscape areas. He recommended that the <br />wording "grassed or surfaced to control dust" be changed to <br />"surfaced with gravel or paved ". <br />DeLonais told the Planner that the land is hard to <br />landscape because of subsoils. He also stated that he <br />agrees with a wording change. <br />The Planner also discussed the 5 foot strip surrounding all <br />parking areas presently required by the Zoning Ordinance. <br />He also suggested that at least two thirds of the <br />landscaping be located forward of the rear building line of <br />the principal building. <br />DeLonais asked who sees it accept those who do business <br />there. <br />The Planner said that it's true that those who see it are <br />those doing business there, but that if that is the <br />attitude, than less care is taken and the property value <br />will be decreased. <br />DeLonais directed the Planner to give the Commission a <br />Page 4 <br />