Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Lawrence Lavin, lawyer in land use work, stated that with the language in condition No.1, they were <br />being asked to file a blank check. He wanted an agreement on the language. <br /> <br />Davidson asked what the purpose of the median cut was. <br /> <br />Tom Phare, Public Works Director, explained that it would be for emergency vehicle access, both <br />in and out of the facility. <br /> <br />Davidson pointed out all of the other properties along McCaslin that did not have a median cut. <br /> <br />Davidson called for the applicant's summary. <br /> <br />Thomasch stated that on condition No.2, brick columns, they would be incorporating columns that <br />are appropriate to the design of the fence; No.3, they had no problem with; No.4, would be worked <br />out with staff; No.5, they would commit to a lighting standard for that area; No.6, ; they still <br />preferred to use vinyl siding on the building. <br /> <br />Mayer stated that on condition No.1, approval would be conditional upon this language being <br />worked out; therefore, there will be no approval until there is an agreement between the City and the <br />applicant on this issue. <br /> <br />Mayer moved that Council approve Resolution No.9, Series 1998, with the following conditions: <br /> <br />1.) That the applicant agrees to formalize the commitment to participate in the possible <br />future funding of the McCaslin Interchange improvements that will be worked out <br />in the Subdivision Agreement between staff and the applicant and that a note to the <br />Subdivision Agreement will appear on the Plat with the language that is currently <br />written, modified to include the note on the Plat. <br />2.) On the Fence, that the applicant and staff work out a reasonable arrangement for the <br />brick columns that are visible from McCaslin. <br />3.) As is. <br />4.) As is. <br />5.) Be changed that the applicant and staff will work out lighting through a mutually <br />agreed lighting standard. <br />6.) Remove condition No.6. <br />7.) To make it clear that the Special Review Use only applies to this property and any <br />other use would require a new PUD process and that there is no vested property right <br />to any other use of the property. <br />8.) Remove the median cut. <br /> <br />Levihn seconded. <br /> <br />4 <br />