My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Revitalization Commission Agenda and Packet 2013 07 08
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
REVITALIZATION COMMISSION
>
2004-2019 Revitalization Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2013 Revitalization Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Revitalization Commission Agenda and Packet 2013 07 08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 10:19:25 AM
Creation date
7/10/2013 2:20:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
RCPKT 2013 07 08
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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
Revitalization Commission <br />Minutes <br />June 10, 2013 <br />Page 4 of 4 <br /> <br /> <br />Commissioner Menaker asked why improvements beyond what is required by <br />City code are requested. Planning Director Troy Russ replied that the extension <br />of the storm water is the biggest expense. All development is required to <br />accommodate existing storm water flows traversing a property. Currently, the <br />entire shopping center is served by a detention facility located on the southeast <br />portion of the Safeway parcel. The developer was offered options under the <br />existing City requirements by the public works department: 1) to continue to <br />accommodate storm water cross flows, or 2) divert storm water flows from the <br />adjacent property to an extended inlet within South Boulder Road. <br /> <br />Several Commissioners expressed that this is coming to the Commission late. <br />There was discussion of which improvements benefit public vs. which <br />improvements benefit the developer. It was generally agreed upon that storm <br />water drainage improvements, street lights and sidewalks benefit the public and <br />the water line benefits the developer. <br /> <br />The Commission agreed to allow staff to prepare an agreement with the <br />developer for assistance to the project, with a not-to-exceed amount of $380,000. <br /> <br /> <br />c. DELO Redevelopment PUD Referral <br />Mayor Muckle recused himself. <br /> <br />Commissioner Lathrop said the process with DELO has been exemplary and <br />LRC has done their work. <br /> <br />Commissioner Gorsevski commented that the overall design is good. He <br />questioned the layout of the utilities and said they looked different. Troy said <br />Public Works is reviewing. Grosevski also questioned the rationale behind <br />phasing. He said a bike path would be nice. <br /> <br />The Core Area Infrastructure agreement will spell out what LRC is funding, what <br />developer is doing and what City Council is approving. <br /> <br />Commissioner Menaker said he would like to authorize Aaron to write a litter to <br />Planning Commission endorsing the project. <br /> <br />New items for Next Meeting July 8, 2013 <br />Coal Creek Station Staff Update <br /> <br />Commissioners’ Comments – <br /> <br />Meeting Adjourned at 8:53 AM
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.