My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2023 05 11
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2023 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2023 05 11
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2023 1:12:16 PM
Creation date
6/13/2023 10:35:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
5/11/2023
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.
/
69
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 13, 2023 <br />Page 7 of 12 <br />Ritchie says additional analysis is required and the hearing could be continued if <br />the commission needs that information. Staff could not complete that analysis <br />tonight. <br />Krantz if we are allowing certain uses like many restaurants or fastfood <br />restaurants under this GDP, to go up to a density that would allow twice the size <br />of the building, would this affect traffic impact? Concerned that the maximum <br />would need to be considered. <br />Ritchie the maximum has been established already. Staff ensures that any new <br />development in this GDP would comply with all provisions. Because this is only a <br />use restriction and doesn't deal with building size at all staff has not explored <br />possible changes to current maximums. <br />Applicant Presentation: <br />Wade Arnold, The Colorado Group <br />Arnold says the property owner purchased this several years ago and at the <br />time of purchase, there were several uses that are actually prohibited now. We <br />are looking to backfill the building so we do not have huge vacancies. We have <br />run into uses being prohibited and lists examples of uses. He discusses the <br />difficulties of getting tenants because of the use restrictions. <br />Commissioner Questions of Applicant: <br />Brauneis says there are two office uses mentioned. What is your reaction to <br />perhaps excluding those? <br />Arnold says he is not familiar enough with the City code of what constitutes an <br />office. He discusses what kind of businesses could be in the space if they were <br />being used as an office space. He can see more service -oriented offices in this <br />space in the future. <br />Krantz asks if they have had any communication or feedback with the <br />neighboring tenants. <br />Arnold says he is not aware of any feedback from the neighbors. <br />Public Comment: <br />None is heard. <br />Closing Statement by Applicant: <br />None is heard. <br />Closing Statement by Staff. <br />Krantz mentions to staff that the wording in this list does not match exactly the <br />wording in the code. Was the intention to simplify the wording to make it more <br />user friendly? <br />Ritchie says staff was pulling from the code section 17.072.090 commercial and <br />office. <br />Krantz uses the example of an art gallery and not including museums and <br />cultural facilities. <br />24 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.