Laserfiche WebLink
Franklin: <br /> <br />Howard: <br /> <br />Boulet: <br /> <br />Howard: <br /> <br />Leesman: <br />Howard: <br /> <br />Leesman: <br /> <br />Franklin: <br /> <br />Leesman: <br /> <br />The Planning Commission closed it's <br />review with nine conditions (SEE <br />ATTACHED SHEET) and that was the end <br />of their review. As a follow-up <br />staff reviewed revised Plats (which <br />Council had copies of) against the <br />conditions. We find that the <br />conditions have been met. The <br />Memorandum of Understanding has been <br />received and signed. The only issue <br />that is up for further discussion <br />after the Planning Commission was <br />done was regarding the note on <br />future off-site access. As a matter <br />of procedure, Planning Commission <br />finished it's business and staff <br />reviewed the revisions against the <br />specific requirements, comments, and <br />conditions. That is what we present <br />to Council. <br /> <br />Condition No. 1 (SEE ATTACHED SHEET) <br />- Why 28 ft. flowline to flowline? <br />That's pretty small. <br /> <br />Typical is 36 ft. The Developer <br />initially came in with a plan with a <br />24 ft. flowline to flowline. The <br />Planning Commission was very <br />concerned about that. The plan was <br />revised to what you see here. The <br />Planning Commission attached a <br />condition that there would be no <br />parking on the non-loading side of <br />the street. <br /> <br />Mr. Leesman, if there's a condition <br />that you can't have parking on the <br />street, is that going to increase <br />the need for Police checks and <br />surveillance? <br /> <br />I would assume so. <br /> <br />Is that going to cause any undue <br />problem to your staff? <br /> <br />How many blocks is that? <br /> <br />Forty houses. <br /> <br />We'll have to check that on a <br /> <br />20 <br /> <br /> <br />