Laserfiche WebLink
Motion carried. Voting yes: Chairman Peterson,.Commissioners <br />[~endriksen, Deemer, Zimmerman and LaDue. Votzng no= None. <br /> <br />~ioner Howell. <br /> <br />Shumway, <br /> Absent.. <br /> <br />(Note: At this time, Chairman Peterson left the meeting.) <br /> <br />~: Request for Preliminary Plat ADDrOVal of Autumn Meadows: Case <br /> of ~r. Ken Johrmon - -- <br /> <br />Mr. Richard Vagle was pre. s.ent representi.ng Mr. Ken Johnson. Mr. Vagle <br />explained the revised prelununazy 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 />concerns had been regarding a second access to the plat. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Deemer and seconded by Commissioner Hendriksen to <br />reo~ approval of the revised preliminary plat of Autumn Meadows provided <br />the drainage plan for the original plat is retained. <br /> <br />Further discussion: Ommmissioner Hendriksen commented on the Park Cc~mission's <br />recommendation of fees to satisfy the City's park dedication reguireuents. Vice <br />C~aizman Zimmerman noted that the revised plat meets the City Code. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting yes: Vice Chairman Zimmerman, Commissioners LaDue, <br />~endriksen and Deemer. Voting no: None. Abstaining: Commissioner Shumway. <br />Absent: Chairman Peterson and Cc~ssioner Howell. <br /> <br />Request for Metes and Bounds Subdivision: Case of Mr. William <br /> <br />Motion by Ccmmtissioner Hendriksen and seconded by Om~/ssioner 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 />Bendriksen, De,er and Sht~way. Voting no: None. Absent: Chairman Peterson <br />and C~ssioner Howell. <br /> <br />Requ_ est for Concept Review of Planned Unit Development Proposal: <br />Case of Mr. Art Paudio <br /> <br />Mr. Art ]{audio was present and explained his proposal for a planned unit <br />develolmmnt for residential and home occupation uses south of 149th Avenue N.W. <br />and west of County Road ~56. Mr. Raudio stated that he was seeking the <br />C~ssion's comments on proposed covenants for this P.U.D. as well as traffic <br /> <br />Tae Oammission reviewed the proposed covenants. The C(m~ission noted that the <br />City Attorney and City ~gir~cr should review the P.U.D. and covenants. The <br />Commission 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 C(m~/~ion <br /> <br />Page 4 of 6 <br /> <br /> <br />