08-26-1986 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . Page 2 Planning Commission Minutes 8/26/86 Discussion was carried on regarding the layout of the proposed development. Chairman Tral1e stated that he was not in favor of the plat as presented, as he did not feel that parcel was large enough to accommodate the buildings, garages, parking area and green space required and that there must be a better way to develope the parcel. Mr. Rohlf stated that the ordinance allows a maximum of 50 units but that he also felt it was a poor lot for that many units. Additional parking issues were discussed including visitor parking and the fact that no on street parking was available in the area. Mr. Anda explained the probable traffic the plat, and how the majority of the Mr. Anda also explained that there could be piled up and stated that if have to haul it out. flow that would be moving through traffic would access Highway 169. were five or six areas where snow this was not adequate, they would Chairman TraIled closed the public hearing. Chairman Tralle and Commissioner Fuchs stated that they felt all the concerns brought up in the previous discussion of the plat still have not been addressed, such as distance between access onto 5th and Highway #169 and stacking problems which may be created. Also, Commissioner Fuchs stated that he was concerned about traffic moving through Ron's Foods and the muncipal liquor store. COMMISSIONER FUCHS MOVED TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DENY THE REQUEST BY ANDA CONSTRUCTION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR MORE THAN ONE PRINCIPAL BUILDING ON A LOT AS PRESENTED. COMMISSIONER TEMPLE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 6-0. Mr. Rohlf stated that some of the questions referred to had been answered. He stated Mr. Anda has explained his plan for snow removal, that the setback from the centerline of Highway #169 was not required as he had previously thought, that the water hookup would be off 5th Street and the sewer off Baldwin, because this was the only way it could be done. The Planning Commission generally agreed that the reason for denial was because the piece of property was not conducive to the design for such a large number of units and did not allow enough room for the required firelane, parking, green space and snow removal. Mr. Rohlf indicated that Mr. Anda would have an opportunity to address the City Council on the issue and recommended that prior to the City Council meeting, Mr. Anda should work on getting the easements necessary and revise the plan to show the 10 ft. setback for parking from the lot line and also should show where the sewer and water lines will be.