My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL MINUTES 04151986
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Minutes
>
1986
>
PL MINUTES 04151986
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 5:55:42 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 5:55:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
21
SP Folder Name
PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1986
SP Name
PL MINUTES 04151986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
1 Commissioner Hansen indicated he perceived from observing the traffic- problems • <br /> 2 at the Apache Medical Building that there might be more traffic and parking <br /> 3 problems with that type of business than with some retail . He said he was <br /> 4 especially concerned with the parking and especially where the parking spaces <br /> 5 were proposed. Commissioner Madden indicated he shared those concerns and <br /> 6 indicated the developers statement that any overflow parking outside the Kenzington <br /> 7 at night might be funneled to,-the commercial. space also bothered him. Mr. Childs <br /> 8 indicated he understood the developers were considering letting some of the <br /> 9 tenants use the Kenzington underground parking. <br /> 10 <br /> 11 The motion to table by Commissioner •Madden and seconded by Commissioner Hansen <br /> 12 was ruled out of* order because .the hearing had not been closed when Jim Guttormson <br /> 13 of Environmental Expressions, the project architect, arrived at approximately <br /> 14 9:00 P.M. <br /> 15 <br /> 16 Mr. Guttormson told the Commissioners he had drawn -up a different layout for the <br /> 17 building after an accurate survey had been obtained. He said the developers <br /> 18 had found that they had lost about 15 -feet on the west side which required <br /> 19 "tightening down an already tight site" by establishing ,the best parking possible <br /> 20 at the same time as much greenery is kept to maintain as much interest as <br /> 21 possible. He said this required using the adjacent alley for pull-in parking. <br /> 22 <br /> 23 The architect presented a model of the proposed project and indicated that, <br /> 24 because of the constraint on the site and actual alignment of the building, <br /> 25 the drive-through feature in original plans had been filled in and another floor <br /> 26 on the bri.dgelike section had been added to maximize the square footage of the <br /> • <br /> 27 building. He said providing angle parking would allow some landscaping between <br /> 28 parking stalls to give "a little life" to the project appearance. There would be • <br /> 29 no objections about the zero setback on the Kenzington side from those developers, <br /> 30 Mr. Guttormson indicated, and a sidewalk is planned to connect to the Kenzington <br /> 31 underground parking area where the architect said he understood the ratios are <br /> 32 showing there would be lot -more parking than would be used by the condominium <br /> 33 residents . <br /> 34 <br /> 35 Handicapped ramps at all three entrances and four handicapped parking spaces <br /> 3,6 had been proposed in the back of. th'e building to encourage the prospective <br /> :37 medical tenant. In regard to the �hreight variances his clients were seeking, <br /> 38 the architect indicated he perceived the ceiling line ended at the allowed 35 <br /> 39 feet and "an unusable unstorgeabl.e" attic area he termed as a "belfrey" made <br /> 40 up the seven and a half foot difference. Mr. Guttormson stated he believed "the <br /> 41 matching of this building would relate to and strengthen the overall powerfulness <br /> 42 of this Kenzington product" . <br /> 43 <br /> 44 When Commissioner Hansen questioned .in what areas and how the square footage of <br /> 45 the building had been reduced from-the original proposal , the architect told <br /> 46 him the difference between the 16,500 originally approved and the 16,284 square <br /> 47 feet proposed now had resulted from a 2,000 square foot error -in calculation by <br /> 48 someone in his office. He said META had considered at least 15,000 square feet <br /> 49 would be necessary to justify this project. <br /> 50 <br /> 51 The architect told Chair Franzese a proposal had been made to the library across <br /> 1 52 the street to move into 2,400 square feet of the main floor of this building. <br /> 53 When she said promoting a high traffic use for the building concerned her, • <br /> 54 Mr. Guttormson said there was less than a 25% chance of that ever happening because <br /> 55 the people who run the library are very satisified where they are. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.