My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 1996 07 09
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
1994-1999 Planning Commission
>
1996 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 1996 07 09
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/7/2024 1:17:04 PM
Creation date
3/7/2024 1:16:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
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.
/
52
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
• <br />• <br />• <br />Public Comments;, <br />There were none. <br />Commission Ouestions: <br />Commission Litpon: <br />Q. Has there been any decision with regard to the realignment of 88th street? <br />A. Orr: My understanding is that the 88th street realignment occurs at the intersection of <br />Dillon Road. This package offers a dedication of a 60 foot right-of-way along 88th that <br />would allow for that, which would ultimately be up to the City. <br />Q. Has there been any thought with regard to the commercial parcels? <br />A. The uses which are outlined in the design guidelines are what you could envision there. <br />We have not tried to marked the property yet. <br />Q. So the intent is to sell it for a totally unrelated use, but compatible to the development of <br />the overall site. <br />A. Correct. <br />Commission McAvinew: <br />Q. Is it correct that the City wants to keep 88th to a two lane road because of the bridge <br />limitation? <br />A. Orr: I don't believe that it was necessarily tied to the bridge restriction. The bridge, at <br />some point in the future, will probably be replaced. <br />Commissioner Boulet: <br />Q. Is the attachment of the design development standards to the Intergovernmental <br />Agreement the exact version or is there a later one? <br />A. Paul Wood: The version dated June 7th is the latest version. <br />Q. There is some mention of retail use, please explain. <br />A. Orr: Retail is precluded and would not be allowed. <br />Q. Will the internal inconsistency's in these documents be addressed? <br />A. That was attached at the City's request and was never intended to be part of the <br />Intergovernmental agreement. <br />Commission VanNostrand: <br />Q. Has there been any thought to pedestrian and bicycle access? <br />A. Our intent is to invite the community to use the facilities. The access will be sized to <br />accommodate both pedestrian and bicycles. <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.