My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2014 04 10
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2014 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2014 04 10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 9:55:21 AM
Creation date
7/30/2014 3:23:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
PCMIN 2014 04 10
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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 />April; 10, 2014 <br />Page 7of 37 <br />right. Isee this as a pseudo-subdivision. Iknow what the guidelines state, butIthink <br />the lot isreally being subdivided with two different buildings on it. It is allowed but I <br />don’t necessarily agree with it. Preservation of the community is good. Iknowsthat the <br />property to the north will probably be developing and the property on the south has <br />talked about redeveloping. There is going to be some change on that corner. <br />Moline says he looked at the northern elevation and had some of the same concerns. <br />The staff report says that the IBC requires all buildings located within 5’ of a property <br />line to be constructed with fire rated materials and may not have any openings. He <br />assumes this is within 5’ of the line. <br />McCartney says yes, absolutely. <br />Moline sayshe assumes the reason for this wall appearance is to meet the code. <br />Pritchard says he knows it is. He says it doesn’t inspire him as there is noequal-sized <br />building next to it.The wallwill be visible until something happens to the north with a <br />higher and better use;then it is a mute point. In the interim, it is not the image Iwould <br />like to see. <br />Rice says he had the same presumption that Moline did. Until this area redevelops, <br />there aren’t many choices to do with the north wall. It will have another “nothing” wall <br />that faces it. <br />Pritchard says we will have to live with the view. <br />Motion made by Brauneis to approve Resolution No.03, Series 2014: 931 Main Street, <br />seconded by Ricewith the two conditions. <br />Name Vote <br />Chris PritchardNo <br />Jeff MolineYes <br />Ann O’ConnellYes <br />Cary TenglerYes <br />Steve BrauneisYes <br />Scott Russell Yes <br />Tom RiceYes <br />Motion passed/failed:Pass <br />Motion passes. <br />Community Food Share Signs: <br />A request for a planned unit <br />development (PUD) amendment to allow additional signs at 650 Taylor <br />Avenue. <br />Applicant, Owner and Representative:Community Food Share <br />Case Manager: Scott Robinson, Planner I <br />Conflict of Interest and Disclosure: <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.