Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />February 28, 1995 <br /> <br />Page 6 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Jeff Gongoll, representing Riverside Development, stated that staff's <br />recommendations are reasonable and workable, Le., a monument-style sign <br />rather than a pylon sign, location of the access, realignment of the drive aisle <br />with the property across Evans Avenue, and letters from UPA and Super America. <br />He did express his concern for the Highway 169 landscaping recommendation, <br />citing the visibility issue. <br /> <br />Chair Kuester opened the public hearing. There being no comments from the <br />public, Chair Kuester closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding the location of the drive aisle between the Super <br />America and the proposed commercial strip. Jeff Gongoll stated that the <br />options may be limited due to the existing fixtures (gas pumps). <br /> <br />Steve Ach explained that signage at Evans and 193rd would clearly identify the <br />entrance to the commercial site. <br /> <br />Terry Maurer stated that his concern regarding the drainage plan relates to <br />whether or not there are sufficient catch-basins throughout the plat to handle the <br />drainage. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Commissioner Dillon expressed his concern that both the access to the <br />commercial center and the access to Super America allow two-way traffic. He <br />suggested that one access be identified as an entrance and one as an exit. <br />Further, he suggested that the entrance to the future office development across <br />Evans Avenue be coordinated so as not to add to traffic congestion. <br /> <br />Terry Maurer stated that the best scenario would be to abandon the Super <br />America access and have one entrance/exit point to both sites. Jeff Gongoll <br />stated that Super America was not in favor of that proposal and that is why it was <br />constructed as it appears today. <br /> <br />Judy Thompson questioned Terry Maurer's memo regarding the outdoor patio <br />seating area. Terry stated that he felt there would not be a problem locating an <br />open patio over a drainage and utility easement but he would not want a <br />permanent enclosure that could potentially have to be dismantled in the event <br />of a problem within the easement. <br /> <br />Chair Kuester questioned whether or not Mr. Gongoll had a problem with the <br />landscaping recommendations. Mr. Gongoll stated he was not in favor of <br />plantings along Highway 169 that would interfere with visibility. Steve Ach <br />suggested that medium size shrubs be used such as were recommended for Elk <br />Park Center and other commercial projects along Highway 169. <br /> <br />COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY <br />PHOENIX ENTERPRISES, LLC, PUBLIC HEARING CASE NO. CU 95-01, FOR A <br />CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ALLOWING A ZERO LOT LINE DEVELOPMENT BASED ON <br />THE FOLLOWING: STAFF'S REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE CITY <br />ENGINEER' MEMOS DATED 2/17/95 AND 2/27/95, AND THE FACT THERE WAS NO <br />PUBLIC OPPOSITION, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: <br /> <br />. <br />