My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2020 08 13
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2020 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2020 08 13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/12/2020 10:36:38 AM
Creation date
11/12/2020 10:36:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
8/13/2020
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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 />August 13, 2020 <br />Page 9 of 12 <br /> <br />wisdom in requiring the 60 feet requirement, and thinks the proposed design does not fit <br />a space that is the rural gateway to the city. <br /> <br />Rice discusses the concept of enhanced landscaping. In his opinion, a buffer creates <br />actual space and enhanced landscaping will only screen what is trying to be screened, <br />which is not a sufficient buffer. That is just a wall of trees. He does not think that <br />approach solves the problem. He mentions that he was also very struck by Pastor <br />Candy’s letter that he submitted saying that their church needs to move forward with <br />their other development and the financial aspect of this. He wants to get this project <br />moving. It has to be recognized that at the last meeting, there was a compromise of <br />giving the additional 5 feet. The original plan was to have the parking east of the <br />buildings. We are even allowing the parking to come up to the 55 foot mark. He believes <br />that there has already been compromise. The applicant is saying that they cannot give <br />up that additional 5 feet, and staff believes it is appropriate to stick to the 55 feet. He is <br />reluctant to try to compromise with the applicant. For example, the applicant wanting a <br />35 setback and staff wanting a 55 setback and meeting in the middle of the two in order <br />to compromise is, in his opinion, not an appropriate way to solve the problem. <br /> <br />Diehl moves and Moline seconds to approve Resolution 9, Series 2020. <br /> <br />Motion passes 5-1 by a roll call vote. <br />Name Vote <br />Chair Steve Brauneis Yes <br />Vice Chair Tom Rice Yes <br />Keaton Howe No <br />Jeff Moline Yes <br />Debra Williams Yes <br />Ben Diehl Yes <br /> <br />Motion passed/failed: Passed <br /> <br />Agenda Item B: 578 S Pierce PUD and SRU <br />A request for a Planned Unit Development and Special Review Use to allow <br />development of a new single-story building for pet care (dog day care) and associated <br />site improvements. (Resolution 11, Series 2020) REQUEST TO CONTINUE TO <br />SEPTEMBER 10, 2020 <br />o Applicant: Dogs for Days, dba Camp Bow Wow <br />o Case Manager: Harry Brennan, Planner II <br />Hoefner re-joins the meeting to partake in the discussion of agenda items B and C. <br /> <br />Brauneis moves and Howe seconds a motion to continue agenda item B to the <br />September 10, 2020 planning commission meeting. Motion passes unanimously by a <br />roll call vote. <br /> <br />Agenda Item C: Parbois Place PUD – 3rd Amendment <br />A request to for a third amendment to the Parbois Place PUD to remove the <br />requirement to demolish the garage on Lot 6, located at 543 County Road. (Resolution <br />10, Series 2020) <br />o Applicant: Lynn Koglin <br />o Case Manager: Harry Brennan, Planner II <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.