My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2012 10 11
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2012 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2012 10 11
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 9:55:20 AM
Creation date
1/31/2013 8:53:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
PCMIN 2012 10 11
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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 />October 11, 2012 <br />Page 4 of 11 <br /> <br /> <br /> Each single-family detached home will have a 2-car attached garage <br /> <br /> Each single-family attached home will have a 2-car garage AND 16 visitor <br />parking space surrounding the central park. <br /> <br /> The multi-family lot provides 100 parking spaces for 60 units for a 1.66 parking <br />ratio. The GDP permits a 1.5 parking ratio for multi-family. <br /> <br /> Staff recommends approval. <br />Commission Questions of Staff <br />Brauneis asked if there was a loss of multi-family for this amended development. <br />McCartney answered the previous approval was for a mixture of townhomes and <br />multi-family, so the only difference is the addition of the single family detached <br />product. <br />O’Connell asked if there was adequate water supply to serve this development. <br />McCartney answered in the affirmative. <br />Moline asked what staff thought of the pocket parks. <br />McCartney stated he felt the pocket parks provided visual relief for the built <br />environment. <br />Applicant Presentation <br />Chad Kipfer, applicant, discussed how the development corresponded with the <br />existing built environment. <br />Commission Questions of Applicant <br />Moline asked Kipfer to discuss the inclusion of the pocket parks. <br />Kipfer stated the pocket parks are used as common open space for the development. <br />Brauneis asked if there was a breakdown of coverage – open space to built <br />environment. <br />Kipfer says he does not have the exact breakdown but stated the proposal does <br />comply with the lot coverage permitted by the GDP. <br />Russell asked what the definition of multi-family was. <br />Kipfer gave the definition. <br />Tengler asked Kipfer about the parking issues discussed in the emails presented by <br />staff and if he believed these were HOA issues. <br />Kipfer stated it definitely is an HOA issue and it can be addressed internally. <br />Pritchard asked Kipfer to address the issue of the water in Hecla Lake. <br />Kipfer stated Hecla Lake is fed by a ditch and the outlet was broken in an open <br />position. The City maintains the outlet and did not want to fix it until the dam was <br />reconstructed. <br />O’Connell asked about the “U” shaped road and asked if there was any parking <br />permitted on the lane. <br />Kipfer answered no. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.