My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2010 04 08
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2010 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2010 04 08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/12/2021 8:41:13 AM
Creation date
4/12/2010 1:25:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
PCPKT 2010 04 08
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
112
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 />February 11, 2010 <br />Page 13 of 15 <br />Sheets questioned the internal uses (i.e. hotel, lodging, restaurant) and if they <br />are all considered private. <br />Manning stated they are all private with a few exceptions when a conference is <br />held which will be by invitation only. <br />Sheets asked if sales tax would be paid. <br />Manning stated it would be paid. <br />Lipton asked if child care would be provided. <br />Manning stated it would available for employees only. <br />Loo asked if the Goodhue Ditch would continue to be used. Also, is there a <br />requirement for an agreement for access to maintain the ditch? <br />Lipton stated the ditch has a prescriptive agre nt and it will be honored. <br />Staff Summary and Recommendation: <br />McCartney reviewed the planning areas requested setbacks, and the <br />requested height waiver. He reviewed the ons available for the Commission <br />regarding the action they could take this eve <br />Manning stated ConocoPhillips commitment to tproject and their desire to <br />make it work for both the City of Louisville and Cohillips. <br />Commission Comments: <br />Lipton requested com <br />Sheets, Pritchard <br />Lipton identified <br />Space; (2) Does <br />Advisory <br />Loo - sse -d t' ad no additional comments. <br />Sh- equested to -dd the following topics to Lipton's list: (1) What is the <br />commbenefit and (2) Fiscal Model discussion by the Finance Director. <br />Russell r ted to add: (1) TDM issues/concerns, commuting, (2) more <br />information . 'e Urban Agricultural idea — how it might or might not work. <br />Manning stated a Ho itality Vendor would be contracted for the lodging and <br />food service. It is the desire of ConocoPhillips to have the vendor committed to <br />the use of local produce. <br />Lipton asked staff when the commission would see details of the TDM program. <br />McCartney stated is would come forward at time of final review of the PUD. <br />Russell moved and Sheets seconded a motion to continue the public hearing to <br />the February 25, 2010 Planning Commission meeting. Motion passed by voice <br />vote. <br />the Commis <br />stated they had no comments at this time. <br />as that ne d more work or answers: (1) Open <br />• work�or the project; (3) Open Space <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.