Laserfiche WebLink
Motion carried. Voting yes: Chairman Peterson, Commissioners Shumway, <br />Hendriksen, Deemer, Zimmerman and LaDue. Voting no~ None. Absent: <br />Cc~missioner Howell. <br /> <br />(Note: At this time, (hairman Peterson left the meeting.) <br /> <br />Request for Preliminary Plat Approval of Autumn Meadows: Case <br />Qf Mr. Ken Johnson <br /> <br />Mr. Richard Vagle was present representing Mr. Ken Johnson. Mr. Vagle <br />explained the revised preliminary plat contained four lots and a cul-de-sac of <br />Nutria Street less than 600 feet long. <br /> <br />Mr. Jeff Struwve, 8453 168th Lane N.W. commented that the City Council's <br />conoerns __bad__ been regarding a second access to the plat. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Deemer and seconded by Commissioner Hendriksen to <br />r~ approval of the revised preliminary plat of Autumn Meadows provided <br />the drainage plan for the original plat is retained. <br /> <br />Further discussion: Ccmmutssioner ~endriksen oommented on the Park Commission's <br />rec~tion of fees to satisfy the City's park dedication requirements. Vice <br />Chairman Zinm~rman noted that the revised plat meets the City Code. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting yes.. Vice Chairman Zimmerman, Commissioners LaDue, <br />Bendriksen and Deemer. Voting no: None. Abstaining.. Commissioner Shumway. <br />Absent: Chairman Peterson and C~ssioner H~well. <br /> <br />Case ~5: Request for Metes and Bounds Subdivision: Case. of Mr. Willia~ <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner ~endriksen and seconded by Cc~missioner Deemer to table <br />this case until a representative of Mr. Loucks is present. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting yes: Vice Chairman Zimmerman, Commissioners LaDue, <br />Hendriksen, Deemer and ShuTway. Voting no: None. Absent: Chairman Peterson <br />and C~ssi~r Howell. <br /> <br />Case ~: Requ_ est for Concept Review of Planned Unit Development Proposal: <br /> Case of Mr. Art Raudio <br /> <br />Mr. Art Raudio was present and explained his proposal for a planned unit <br />develot~nent for residential and hcme occupation uses south of 149th Avenue N.W. <br />and west of County Road %56. Mr. Raudio stated that he was seeking the <br />Cc~mission's ccm~nents on proposed covenants for this P.U.D. as well as traffic <br />and drainage in the area. <br /> <br />"The 'C~ssion reviewed the proposed covenants. The Commission noted that the <br /> City Attorney and City Engineer should review the P.U.D. and covenants. The <br /> Co~nisston questioned whether retail should be permitted as retail often <br /> generates high traffic and how to limit retail activities. Mr. Raudio <br /> requested clarification regarding screening requirements. The Commission <br /> commented that signage may be uniform- size, colors, shape, etc. The <br /> 1/6/87 - Planning and Zoning Conmzission <br /> <br />Page 4 of 6 <br /> <br /> <br />