Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2010 02 11 ConocoPhillips

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes DECEMBER 10, 2009 Page 3 of 6 McMillan stated it is not included. Sheets asked how it would be included in a deed. McMillan stated it could be included and then it becomes part of the recorded deed document. Hartman questioned the remote parking concept. She asked how many would really use it and how do we protect downtown. McMillan stated remote parking has to be in same zone district and could be used in the Old Town Area. Hartman stated people are going to park where they are going to park and we need to establish some regulations to protect them. McMillan stated there could be neighborhood per Loo asked if a credit for continuous parking at 25k would be ed up. McMillan stated the wording "not to exceplies it would be rounded down. Lipton asked if the item at 5.c. in the staff reduction applied to both shared and on-stre McMillan confirmed it is a total f Sheets stated "total cumulative o clarity. Lipton asked how changing a use wo rt regarding the parking credit bove)" should be added to provide t the poking. McMillan stated .tio woul- ontinue to be 1/500 SF. Lipton asked wh.. e buil► a condo McMillan stated the i as • -d so the parking would not change. Sheets stated the Cit C• it is given a considerable amount of flexibility, but the proposed langua is .. ed. How do we handle reduction of discretion? McMillan stated the ne equir ents are less subjective. Loo asked how other m cipalities are addressing the parking issues. McMillan stated he k Boulder is but he does not know about other communities. Sheets asked if all issues would be complaint driven. McMillan stated that is why we will require an agreement between parties. Sheets asked if both parties would need to complete a parking study. McMillan stated only the party that is developing a site. Sheets asked if deed restrictions are recorded documents. McMillan stated they are recorded.