Planning Commission Minutes 2007 07 12

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes JULY 12, 2007 Page 4 of 13 Jeff Lipton Excused Excused Chris Pritchard No Yes Susan S. Loo No Yes Gail Hartman Yes No Hank Dalton No Yes Michael Deborski Excused Excused Monica Sheets Yes No Tom McA vinew Yes Yes Motion failed: tie vote 3 to 3 Passed: 4 to 2 Deborski returned to the meeting. ~ Resolution No. 17, Series 2007,1900 Cherry St. (Etkin Johnson Group) - a 6.60 acre parcel on the south side of Cherry and east of 104th Ave. approximately 750 feet. - a request for a final subdivision plat and final planned unit development for 66,776 SF building to be located on the westerly 4.89 acres of a 6.60 acre parcel. Case #07- 018-FS/FP. . Applicant and Representative: Etkin Johnson Group (Jim Vasbinder) . Owner: The O'Connor Group (Chris Rebich) . Case Manger: Sean McCartney, Principal Planner and Paul Wood, Planning Director Conflict ofInterest and Disclosure: None heard. Public Notice Verification: Published in the Daily Camera on June 24, 2007. Posted in City Hall, Library, Recreation Center, Police and Courts Building and the City's web site and mailed to the surrounding property owners on June 22, 2007. Staff Report of Facts and Issues: McCartney provided a brief staff report with the following points: . Property is located adjacent to and south of Cherry St., approximately 750 feet west of South 104th. . Parcel is 6.6 acres in size. . The final subdivision plat reflects a two lot subdivision. Lot One (4.84 acres) is associated with a final PUD for a proposed phased flex building. Lot Two (1.20 acres) would be developed for a water quality storm detention facility. . It is also proposed to dedicate the required ROWand construct the last segment of CTC Blvd, which would make the connection to the CTC Filing 2 with Cherry St. . Property access to Lot One is provided by a total of three (3) access points: two on Cherry Street and one on CTC Blvd. . The proposed development exceeds the minimum parking ratio of2.0 spaces per 1,000 SF as required by the IDDSG. . Landscape coverage meets the required 25% as required by the IDDSG. . The applicant is requesting relief from the required 25' width of the landscape buffer to avoid technical conflicts with a required utility easement that is located adjacent to and runs parallel with the south property line.