Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />August 13, 2020 <br />Page 5 of 12 <br /> <br />Commissioner Questions of Applicant: <br />Moline mentions that she displayed a four lane image of 96 th St. Is that consistent with <br />what the city is anticipating with that cross street section? <br /> <br />Rhymer says yes, we would be adding a turning lane and completing the official two <br />lanes on our side. We will also be adding a left turn lane. <br /> <br />Diehl mentions that she made a comment about the rural entryway being a focus for <br />Dillon Rd and 96th St and how that might also apply to CTC. He asks how that was <br />referenced in the comp plan. <br /> <br />Rhymer says that the language says 96th St and Dillon Rd, a rural special district, so it <br />applies to both of those corridors. <br /> <br />Diehl says that it sounds like to him that how they interpreted that principle is that it <br />should apply all the way down to Dillon Rd. <br /> <br />Rhymer says yes, that is correct. <br /> <br />Ritchie reminds them that when we look at that policy and its language, the CTC is its <br />own separate district and language. <br /> <br />Diehl asks if she can clarify on the 8 foot tree lawn mentioned on one of her <br />presentation slides. <br /> <br />Rhymer says that where the image is cut off from the presentation slide, on the other <br />side of the sidewalk, we would have an additional 8 foot tree lawn that is not shown on <br />the slide but that would be in place. There is even more landscaping than what is even <br />being shown on the image. <br /> <br />Diehl asks that if you are in a car driving north on 96th St, is it your interpretation that <br />that is the rural entryway. <br /> <br />Rhymer says that she does. She drives this corridor multiple times a week and that it <br />would be the rural entryway. <br /> <br />Williams asks about the other portion of the property that is not being developed at this <br />time. Would we want to have some continuity for the rest of the parcel? <br /> <br />Rhymer says that the amendments that we are asking for applies to all three parcels. <br />So the 55 foot setback, as well as the parking setback and landscaping we are <br />proposing would also apply to all three parcels. <br /> <br />Brauneis says he is unsure how they came up with the 80 feet. He asks if she can <br />explain it in greater detail. <br /> <br />Rhymer says that if they were to provide a 55 foot parking setback, which has to be <br />from the property line, plus the tree lawn and the right of way, says that it gets to be <br />around 30 feet.