Laserfiche WebLink
Mounda View Planning Comwieaion April 6, 1983 <br />Re$ular Meet~ng Page Three <br />-=---------------~°----°-------------^--~-------^--~------------Yp~oe <br />p~~ Chairman Mountin eu~arized the Planning Comnieeion'e <br />r y <br />'Pechnician Kaa~pel reviewed the ~UA proceba as it <br />relateu to the applicant's proposed devalopment, - <br />but it.wes the concenaus of the Commiaeioners thaC <br />theq would like to Look at the ovarall plan. <br />Technician Kampel. alao stated he would check into <br />/', the skim~ner, ae requested, tcr see whosa respon- <br />r aib3lity it was to.keep it up. <br />LJ • <br />concarne Eor tha applicaat, etating that they are <br />" looking at a emall portion of a vary lurge PUD, <br />and that Staff should resear~h the quesCinn of <br />roviowing only one eaction of a large PUD designation, <br />as they ehould Ua careful not tn undermine the <br />proceesi concern wit'h the drainage area, that it <br />ehould ba suffic3enC ta service Lhe entixe area, <br />that they do not want ta see individunl pondin <br />sitee on eaaFa lot; that traffic patterne are a~eo <br />a concern and that tha etreet ngework ehould <br />interface with fu*.ure developmenCs; that the uea <br />appe~.re to be conaistent with the Comg Plan; <br />end that the Planning Commiaeionere would like to <br />see ~b~rading plan for Y.he whole area and eome type <br />of landscapix~g included; and that Staff shnuld <br />reeearch buiYding aetback requixemente ae they <br />releea to the R-1 ad~acent property, ae the R-1 <br />is not ~a conforming ues. <br />There wae diecuesion among the Commiesioners <br />regarding etreet alignments and easemanta, an~ <br />i.t was further noted that the; appliaant ahould <br />revise his plan to inc],ude solid fenc.ing a.ll' ttee <br />way along the residential proper~y; thaC parking <br />should be brought up to conformence; Staf£ ahonld <br />determine if a variance is required for tkte reei- <br />dential property; i.e., 50' aetback; cetch baein <br />to have adequate stornge .£or the antire pro,~ect; <br />Exhibic 3 far. the aCreet deeign for the easements; <br />and tha landecaping plan to be submitted with <br />the site plan. <br />There was conaiderable diccuesion among the 7. Exieting <br />Co~iseionere ea to the areas in question in tha 2oning/Compxe- <br />Citp Chat are non-conPorming with ~ha Camprehen- henaive PTan <br />sive Plan and existi.ng zoning, wi.th one euggeetion Reviaw <br />being to take all vacant non-conforming lota down I~on-Coitformittg <br />to the lowest poaeible use. Lot Diecueslon <br />Technician Kampel preeentad a map of the City, <br />color coded to ahow the areaa tha~ are non- <br />~ conferming'. <br />