pm_970611 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mary Bakeman, 1178 W. Co. Rd. B: A park is needed south of Highway 36; 40% of community is residential value, with only 17% of value in parks; site is gateway to the City; seniors need open space; need to protect trees, open space and park areas. Dennis Oberg, 1300 Burke: What is Planning Commission going to do when developers come in with traditional plans. Chairman Wietecki advised as of this date what was being presented were ideas only and that an implementation plan is the next step; that the County and City needed to work together on the roads; that there may be a need for ordinance changes; that PUD zoning should be explored as an incentive; if zoning changes were required, the City could declare a moratorium in affected areas. 7(b)Final Design Plans and PUD: Gateway Business Park (OPUS) Rick Jopke introduced Julie Kimble, Director, Real Estate Development, OPUS. Ms. Kimble summarized the current plans and status of the plans. She indicated that environmental issues were being studied; Rick Jopke summarized the status of approvals being processed. Chairman Wietecki asked for presentations of the NE quadrant to the Planning Commission and Council when this area was specificially defined. Ms. Kimble advised there could be three phases and that major changes may require amendment to the PUD. 8(a) Gateway Business Park, EAW Rick Jopke summarized the EAW process and comments received from various governmental agencies. Chairman Wietecki asked if traffic generation figures had been clarified. Jopke responded that they had been clarified by redistributing traffic from different entrances to the site. Overall, traffic numbers remained the same. 8(b) Twin Lakes, EAW Rick Jopke summarized the EAW process and reviewed the comments received. No comments were given by Planning Commission members. 9.ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. J:\PATM\WP51CH\PCMINUTE\97-0611M.WPD 5