My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-02-1982 PC MIN
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Minutes
>
1980 - 1989
>
1982
>
08-02-1982 PC MIN
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:35:58 AM
Creation date
4/25/2006 2:34:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
PCM
date
8/2/1982
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />August 2, 1982 <br />Page Four <br /> <br />to say, that yes, the mall was okay and that no other items would be dis- <br />cussed except for the phasing. <br /> <br />Rick Breezee indicated that the Barthel group needed to know if the Planning <br />Commission liked this idea of a mall, they would present a formal preliminary plat. <br /> <br />Discussion followed regarding the size of the mall and the various sizes that <br />have been approved. It was indicated that there was a change in size at the <br />City Council level from the Planning Commission's recommended size to a larger <br />size of 75,000 square feet with a mall. <br /> <br />Mr. Gary Santwire discussed the sizing and phasing and indicated that it was dif- <br />ferent from the original proposal. <br /> <br />Chairman Tracy indicated that the Planning Commission was looking at two things: <br />the physical appearance and the phasing. Chairman Tracy indicated that he felt <br />the mall was fine; 55,000 square feet of shopping center, 5,000 square feet of <br />restaurant~ Parcel C, 2,000 square feet of bank was also okay. Chairman Tracy <br />indicated he saw nothing different in Phase 1 than what the Planning Commission <br />had already recommended. Phase 2, Parcel B (4 units of housing) was also the <br />same. Chairman Tracy indicated that the phasing seemed to be the same as pre- <br />sented previously. <br /> <br />Rick Breezee indicated that in the new phasing, Phase 1, Parcel A would be to <br />construct 55,000 square feet of shopping center, Parcel B, construct 5,000 square <br />feet of restaurant, Parcel C, construct 2,000 square feet of bank facility, and the <br />buffers. Phase 2, Parcel D, construct 40 units of housing. Phase 3, construct <br />the housing units on Parcel D and E and Phase 5, complete either Parcel A or con- <br />struct Parcel F, whichever was not completed during Phase 3, with City Council and <br />Planning Commission approval based upon a review of growth in the trade area and <br />market conditions and the finding that such improvements in Phase 5 can be sup- <br />ported without negative impact to the City. Rick Breezee further indicated that <br />the size is still going to be 75,000 square feet, but before they can add on an <br />additional 20,000 to the mall, all the housing has to be done and it has to be <br />marketable. It also has to be approved by the City Council and the Planning Com- <br />mission. <br /> <br />Discussion followed regarding sequence of conditions and guidelines relating to <br />Barthel. Discussion also followed regarding various studies to be done by the City. <br /> <br />MOTION BY COMMISSIONER PEARCE THAT THE LAYOUT, WITH THE SCHEDULE OF PHASES AS PRE- <br />SENTED ON AUGUST 2,1982, BE ACCEPTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WITH THE CONDITIONS <br />OF THE ORIGINAL MOTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF JUNE 28, 1982 ALSO BEING <br />ACCEPTED, AND THAT WHEN ALL OF THE INFORMATION IS PUT TOGETHER, THAT THIS PUD BE <br />RETURNED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER <br />GUNKEL~ MOTION PASSED 4-1, 'COMMISSIONER TRALLE ABSTAINING. <br /> <br />9k <br />2. <br /> <br />Consider Addition of Additional Items on Planning Commission Agenda <br /> <br />It was the general consensus of the Planning Commission that items should not be <br />added to the agenda at a late date because of the preparation time involved in an <br />item. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.