My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL PACKET 02201990
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
1990
>
PL PACKET 02201990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 3:40:34 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 3:40:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
15
SP Folder Name
PL PACKETS 1990-1991
SP Name
PL PACKET 02201990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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
10 <br /> 1 driveable surface still needs to be applied. Commenting on <br /> 2 the steepness of the access , Chairperson Madden asked <br /> 3 whether a long emergency vehicle would be able to drive up <br /> 4 that driveway without hitting its undercarriage. Mr. <br /> 5 Brewer replied that. the contractor, after consulting with <br /> 6 Public Works Director Larry Hamer, had indicated that a long <br /> 7 emergency vehicle would be able to negotiate the driveway. <br /> 8 Mr . Brewer agreed that the driveway is steep, but cited the <br /> 9 limitations of the site itself as well as the difficulties <br /> 10 of dealing with the uncooperative owner of the parking lot. <br /> 11 He stated that the initially proposed driveway would have <br /> 12 been a less steep grade, but that that was unacceptable to <br /> 13 the parking lot owner and LaNel en-3ed up having to install- <br /> 14 the r_taining wall . <br /> 15 <br /> 16 Chairperson Madden commented that , when the development was <br /> 17 first being discussed, one of the reasons for seeking to <br /> 18 develop a high-density residence in that area was to <br /> 19 increase the attractiveness and viability of the shopping <br /> 20 center . However , no walkway exists which connects the <br /> 21 complex to the shopping center . Mr . Brewer replied that the <br /> 22 walkway is another issue which needs to be worked out with <br /> 23 the parking lot owner. He stated that LaNel had proposed a <br /> 24 walkway towards the Walker building on the Autumn Woods <br /> 25 property, which was unacceptable to the lot owner. He <br /> 26 indicated that LaNel is not adverse to developing a <br /> 27 pedestrian walkway but has experienced difficulties dealing <br /> 28 with the parking lot owner regarding that issue. <br /> 29 <br /> 30 Chairperson Madden proposed that the retaining wall need <br /> 31 only be brought in three feet eight inches to allow room for <br /> 32 a ramp and steps . Mr . Brewer replied that bringing the <br /> 33 retaining wall in that distance would leave no green space, <br /> 34 which is important to the appearance of the complex. <br /> 35 Additionally, Mr . Brewer stated that the contractor had <br /> 36 expressed some concerns regarding holding the bank if steps <br /> 37 were installed in that area . <br /> 38 <br /> 39 Commissioner Hansen recalled that the emergency vehicle <br /> 40 access was a condition of approval of the project <br /> 41 construction, and asked for verification that an emergency <br /> 42 vehicle will be able to negotiate the steep grade. City <br /> 43 Manager Burt replied that in his discussions with the <br /> 44 firefighters, he had been told that if the building was on <br /> 45 fire they would be fighting the fire from the parking lot of <br /> 46 the shopping center. He stated that if it was a small fire <br /> 47 in one of the units they would just drive in the main <br /> 48 driveway, and he speculated that they might even use a <br /> 49 smaller truck in that case . He stated that if the grade <br /> 50 were flattened out, it would begin in the parking lot, which <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.