PL PACKET 10212003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 16, 2003 Page 15 1 Jake Cadwallader asked the City Attorney if it is proper to present this proposal for approval on 2 property without a redevelopment agreement or purchase of the property in the area. Mr. 3 Shardlow stated that they could not go forward without full site control. He reviewed the 4 process noting that it was explained by their Attorney that as a property owner they are 5 protected. 6 7 Mr. Cadwallader asked Mr. Pratt if he is holding 50% of ownership. Mr. Pratt explained that he 8 has 50% ownership with the retail and 50% ownership with Dan Hunt on the `for sale' properties 9 adding that Dominion would retain full ownership of the apartments. 10 11 Mr. Cadwallader asked if the City has approved the change of ownership. Mr. Pratt stated that it 12 has not yet been signed and reviewed the process noting that he has been very clear, all along, 13 regarding his percentage of ownership. Chair Melsha clarified that presently they are only 14 discussing and recommending approval for land uses. 15 16 Mr. Cadwallader asked if he is included in the redevelopment. He stated that the pictures show 17 that he is included but that his business is not on any sheets as included and asked if he is 18 excluded for the present and/or future. He explained that his business is located at 3800 Apache 19 Lane, south of 39`h. Mr. Pratt explained that the record shows that they are looking for 20 preliminary plat approval for the entire project and final plat approval for the retail. He clarified 21 that he has met with Mr. Cadwallader to discuss his concerns and reviewed with the 22 Commission. He explained that redevelopment properties, subject to T1F, must go through a 23 specific process and that he is trying to work things out with everyone involved. 24 25 Mr. Cadwallader expressed concerns stating that it is not appropriate for the Planning 26 Commission to approve anything until everything in the project is in place and agreed upon. He 27 suggested that they table their discussion until all concerns have been addressed. 28 29 Bruce Malkerson, the Developer's legal counsel, acknowledged that there could be a need for an 30 amendment as they move forward and reviewed the process with the Commission. He assured 31 the Commission that this is nothing out of the ordinary and that this is a commonplace process. 32 He stated that they would like to move forward and that they would work things out with each 33 property owner as they move forward in the process. 34 35 Stan Nelson, 3504 Maplewood Drive, expressed concerns regarding the traffic flow and 36 reviewed the circulation diagram he pulled from the project website. He referenced 39`h Avenue 37 and questioned whether he would be able to safely back out of a parking spot into moving traffic. 38 He referenced the transit stops noting that they occur where the street tends to narrows and that 39 when the bus stops it could block traffic, which would be an issue causing traffic backup in a 40 commercial area. He asked if it would be possible to include a curb cutout for the buses. He 41 noted that the smaller commercial buildings have to be serviced by trucks and asked where the 42 trucks would go and asked if there would be any safety issues with respect to servicing these 43 areas. He asked if he would be able to walk through the site from the south and if there would be 44 sidewalks along Silver Lake Road. 45