My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2023 02 09
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2023 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2023 02 09
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/23/2023 12:05:52 PM
Creation date
2/23/2023 11:46:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
2/9/2023
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.
/
92
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 />November 10, 2022 <br />Page 8 of 13 <br />Staff Recommendation: <br />Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. 16, Series 2022, requesting a <br />General Development Plan Amendment, a Planned Unit Development <br />Amendment, and a Final Plat with easement vacations for a mixed -use <br />development consisting of 38 residential units and 40,562 square feet of <br />commercial area at Block 11 of North End. <br />Commissioner Questions of Staff. <br />Hoefner asks what the key differences are from the last version that was <br />approved. <br />Hassan says this includes attached units versus the previous included detached <br />units but there are different bedroom sizes. <br />Brauneis asks if she can describe the difference with dropping the townhouse <br />designation and moving it to what it is now. <br />Hassan says the original plan came with townhomes and these were individually <br />platted units. Now, these are all under one solid platting. <br />Hoefner says regarding traffic, the public seems to be more concerned with <br />speeding versus the traffic pattern. Has staff looked into that? <br />Zuccaro says the concern is with the existing roadway and that would be <br />something outside of the scope of this proposal. <br />Hoefner says he thought there was an extension between Sweet Clover Ln into <br />Hecla Way. <br />Zuccaro says staff did not ask about this with the applicant but we could ask the <br />applicant to look into it such as a speed bump. <br />Howe asks if there is any kind of requirements with our city forester for proposals <br />like this. <br />Hassan says this proposal was reviewed by our parks and rec department. <br />Howe asks that if the fee in lieu was not approved by city council and required <br />them to do affordable housing, with this come back to the commission with a new <br />PUD? <br />Zuccaro says no, the affordable housing is administered outside of the PUD <br />process. <br />Howe asks if staff can talk about the lighting along South Boulder Rd and the <br />pedestrian path that runs north and south. <br />Hassan says there are pole lights and individual lights for each residential unit <br />has mounted lighting. There are also pole lights for the residential alleyway and <br />parking spaces. There are only entryway lights along South Boulder Rd. <br />Moline says one public comment we got pertained the intersection of South <br />Boulder and Blue Star. Future improvements to that intersection would fall to the <br />city's responsibility and not be related to this proposal. <br />Zuccaro says this roadwork was built with this density in mind. We would not <br />recommend that capacity is needed because the land uses and density are not <br />changing. If this were to be built out and these roadworks were not operating <br />appropriately, it would be the city's responsibility to make the improvements. <br />Howe asks if there are any net zero requirements for these buildings. <br />10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.