Laserfiche WebLink
Mounde View Planning Commieeiott April 6, 1483 <br />Aegulax Meeti.,ng Page Two <br />/~~i Techni.ciatt Kampal raported tiie applicanr, io requesting <br />~. 1 conceptual approval eo construct a 70 unit motel on <br />Lot 1, Block 3, Programmed Land Firet Addition, end <br />ha raviewed the planning coneiderationa. <br />IY. was noted that a reaolution had been passed in ~978 <br />that rescindad any actian on planning on the Northcreat <br />property, St was Further notad that there was con- <br />fueion over the lots daeignated Yn the pxeliminary <br />plat. <br />Mr, Yenieh stated he had nothing £nxther to add to <br />'fechnician tiampel's report. <br />There wae considerable diccusaion among Che Cc~iseionera, <br />with the queetiane befna rai.sed as to wfiether t4e water <br />retention area would be suf~`ic.tent; confus3on over the <br />PI7D proceea, as it was to cover a whole piece oE pro- <br />p~:rty, with the applicant'a propasal bein~ for only <br />one portinn oE the pxoperty; with potentiai problems <br />wiCli etreets:and oo forth; concern with water reten- <br />tion Erom McDonald's, und where it would ga once <br />development occurred, with it being noted that the <br />City's philosaphy on water retenti4n hae changed~ <br />concern with the nwnber oP parking etalls being <br />•-'~ p:ovided and batking out onto the stxeQt; that <br />( fencing should be provided the whole length tsetwaen <br />~ the prapoeed development and the r.esidential <br />property. <br />Mr. Wayne Sacliman, Mr. Gil Hahn, Dir. Yenish and <br />Technician iCampel anawered many of the 4cm9nissionere <br />concerns, ex~laining that the water retention axea <br />had been determined earlier with the MeDonald's <br />development, an3 it was felt L•o be sufficient, but <br />woald be reviewed again, and that the catchmenL• <br />area as shown wou].d provide the required storage <br />espacity for the motel, whi.l.e any furthaz develop- <br />menC might not be covered in tfiet capacity, but <br />would be addresaed when furtliex devalopment was <br />proposed;' that thexe are separate ownerships fox <br />tlze diffor.enh paxcele of 1and, and it wovld be <br />ver.y dif£icult to ~et all the owners in at one <br />time to present their future plane to klie <br />Co~tiesion for their varioua piecea of p~opertty; <br />i.t'was noted the etreet system is planned to <br />service all the property; that the original <br />water retention pLans received the approval of <br />the R3ce Creek Watershed Dietrict and the City, <br />which took into account the MeDanald's dev~elop- <br />mant and proposed future developmant for the <br />°~`'~ remaining land; that Che proposrsd parking con- <br />\~ forme to City requirementa t~nd wae not Eelt to <br />be inadequate. <br />. _ , ~ ;~, , ,;.,:..., ,..,, .; ;, ;. <br />