Laserfiche WebLink
<br />-3- <br /> <br />Discussion <br /> <br />Mr. Sirrons asked if Mr. Dahlgren would be reviewing the landscaping plans. <br />Mr. Dahlgren indicated that he would, at the tirre the applicant cares in to <br />obtain the building permit. <br /> <br />Marge Alton, Gluek lane, expressed ooncern about the three story building. She <br />stated that the nursing hare previously proposed for the site was one story and <br />asked that the proposed building be limited to 1 or 2 stories. She inquired if <br />there would be anything \\hich would extend above the 3rd floor roof. <br /> <br />Mr. Pink responded that there would likely be an elevator tower of about 4 - 5 <br />feet. <br /> <br />Mrs. Alton stated there is presently a traffic problem at the learning Tree <br />Center because the cars are attenpting to make turns by going on the wrong side <br />of the road. She asked the applicant if they intended to construet the road <br />across the north end of lot 1, which would hook into the learning Tree site. <br /> <br />Mr. Pink indicated he doubted the applicant would want to do this until lot #1 <br />had been sold. <br /> <br />Mr. Dahlgren indicated that the Carmission could approve a condition that the <br />private roadway be constructed across the north property line of lot 1, when <br />lot 2 is developed. <br /> <br />Lucille Eng, 2213 Midlothian :Ebad, indicated that there was alI!eady a traffic <br />problem on County lbad B and Herschel. <br /> <br />Fecamendation <br /> <br />Mr. Kellett rroved and Mrs. Cushing secorrled, that the Carmission reCC>IrmeIld <br />approval of M. M. D:!veloprtEIlt Corporation's request for preliminary plat at <br />1751 County Foad B with the oondition that the private roadway on the north lot <br />line of lot 3, be completed at the tirre of the developrent of Lot 2. :Ebll Call, <br />Ayes: Kellett, G. Johnson, Cushing, Mastel, Rukavina and G. Johnson. Nays: <br />None. Abstention: Sirrons. Mr. Sirrons abstained because he would like to see <br />the proposed roadway pattern laid out before approval. <br /> <br />Other Business <br /> <br />Mr. Rukavina inquired if it would be possible to mail notices of public hearing <br />to property owners farther than the required 250 feet for applications such as <br />the M. M. D:!veloprent plat. 'Ihe present City code requires notifying all property <br />owners within 250 feet of the property in questions for all applications except <br />rezoning, for which 350 feet is required. 'Ihere was also discussion about the <br />possibility of posting a sign on the property for which an application is made, <br />advising what the application is, when the public hearing will be held, etc. <br /> <br />Feconmen.dation <br /> <br />Mr. Sirrons IIDved and Mrs. Cushing secorrled, that the Coomission recomrend that <br />the City COuncil give consideration to increasing the 250 foot distance for <br />notifying property owners of planning applications and/or the placerrent of a <br />