My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2012 06 14
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2012 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2012 06 14
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 9:55:20 AM
Creation date
1/31/2013 8:31:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
PCMIN 2012 06 14
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />June 14, 2012 <br />Page 4 of 10 <br /> <br />Public Comment and Planning Commission and Staff interaction regarding public <br />comment: <br />Michael Menaker, 1827 W. Chokecherry Dr. stated he just made a quick site visit. He <br />noted: 1) no one on the roof top was looking over the railing and the patio was <br />packed; 2) the location of the windows should provide no light bleed into the <br />neighbor’s yard in addition to what they already have from the bank. <br />Russ noted the lighting fixtures of 25-30 feet high are located at the bank, Waterloo, <br />the Rex and the State Mercantile Building. <br />O’Connell inquired if the window would open. <br />Blanchard stated they would not open and there is no sill on the inside. <br />Gibbs stated people will still be able to see out the windows. She stated the windows <br />should be placed higher or on the south wall. <br />Menaker stated when the home was purchased ten years ago the town had a very <br />quiet downtown with limited activity. Now the property owner encounters a very active <br />downtown, especially in the evenings and on the weekend. He also stated he sees <br />the issue as not so much light but more of a perception of an invasion of privacy. <br />Blanchard stated he was interested in working with the neighbors and requested staff <br />to assist in reviewing what type of additional fencing could be added to the property. <br />Closed Public Hearing – Planning Commission Discussion: <br />Brauneis acknowledged the back yard may have a perception of less privacy, but that <br />he does not find legal cause to not support the request. <br /> Moline stated he appreciates the neighbors concerns and thanked them for coming <br />to speak this evening. He stated he supports the request. <br />O’Connell stated her decision to not support the request has been very difficult. <br />Pritchard discussed his personal experience with people in his backyard adjacent to <br />Davidson Mesa. <br />Roll Call Vote: <br />Moline moved and Brauneis seconded a motion to approve Resolution No. 12, Series <br />2012 as presented by staff. <br /> <br />Name Vote <br />Jeff Lipton Excused <br />Chris Pritchard Yes <br />Ann O’Connell No <br />Cary Tengler Excused <br />Jeff Moline Yes <br />Steve Brauneis Yes <br />Scott Russell Excused <br />Motion passed: 3 to 1 <br /> <br /> Resolution No. 13, Series 2012 <br />– Steel Ranch South – A final <br /> <br />subdivision plat and final planned unit development (PUD) for an <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.