CC PACKET 09272011 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 21, 2003 Page 5 Chair "sha agreed noting that the resident's comments have been duly noted. he is com able with the plan as presented. i stated that Mr. Gibbs dis eed with the proposed landscaping stating that he would'prefer fencing. He expressed cone s regarding safety of the neighborhood adding that e was also concerned about additional p estrian traffic. Mr. Gavic agreed adding that is concerned about the additional pedestria traffic through their yards. Commissioner Stromgre asked Mr. Gavic and Mr. Gibbs ere the traffic would come from. Mr. Gavic stated that they e concerned about additio al/edestrian traffic coming from the streets and surrounding area. Chair Melsha noted the Residents quest for fen ng adding that he felt that the landscaping was the better choice for the area. He no d the linof vision stating that the taller trees would provide a level of privacy. The Reside is a owledged the line of vision adding that there is also an added concern with respect to a p al increase in pedestrian traffic through their yards. The Residents expressed concer s r arding the safety in the area in addition to privacy issues. Chair Tillman noted that the Ian scaping plan cal for deciduous trees, which would eventually be very large trees, as tall as uilding. She asked i they were asking for a fence only or a fence with the landscaping. he expressed concerns t t there would not be enough room for both. The Residents ask e if it would be possible to hav both. Chair Melsha suggested having the developer review t plans to determine what could be eluded as a barrier and leave the final decision to the veloper's discretion. He stated that he comfortable with the proposal as it is. Vice Chair Stille tated that in the long run, landscaping would be ore appealing. He noted that the conse us of the residents is that they would prefer fencing. Ms. Sulliv n asked who would be responsible for maintaining the fencin nd the landscaping. Chair M sha stated that it would be the responsibility of the developer. Mot n by Chair Melsha, second by Vice Chair Stille, to recommend approval o the PUD as pr ented, as amended with the additional 38 parking stalls, conditional on the ap oval and r viewal of plans by the City Attorney, Condition of the Replat and with the conditi that the andscape plan, as proposed, can be amended at the discretion of the applicant in lieu o the south end of the property to provide a fence. IX. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION. 9.1 Susan Hall stated as requested at the September 16"' Planning Commission meeting, the St. Anthony Shopping Center has presented sign criteria to address logo signage for their DR