Laserfiche WebLink
2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 10.4 T�e City Planner also izadicated �hat u�an review o�t�e sub�z�zattal and consultatzan with <br />6 ihe Ci�y Attorney, the 60-c�ay re�riew d�adlin� was extended an additional b0 day� {until <br />7 August 3, 2007) due tn the a3�sence of pertin�nt informatian to properiy review and <br />8 pro�vide �he Pia�az�ing Coz�az�azssion, a�d subseque�tly the Ci�y Cau�acil, a <br />9 recarz�mandation. <br />10 <br />11 10.5 Discussian ens��d regarding the AUAR, t�e z�e�d �'or an EAW, develop�nent of Twin <br />12 La�Ces �'arkway az�dlor Mawat Ridge Raad, and the proppsed uses and tl�eir allowance <br />I3 under the Co�nprehenszve �'laan. and �k�e Twi� Lakes Master Plan. <br />�4 <br />15 10.6 �ohn Livingston, applica�zt (Cent V�niur�s) addressed ti�e Corr�mission seeking support <br />16 for his �roposal. �-Ie indicated tl�at ha� a�tempted to r�ork �vith staff, b�t feels �hai soanae <br />17 af the de�ands are noi pertinent ta the pk�ase a£the proposa�. <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />3S <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />�4 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />10.7 Mr. Livingstnn fiurther added his in�erpr��ation of �he sta�us ni ��e AUAR and his lack of <br />i��terest i� perfo�zn� a discretioz�a�ry EAW d�e ta tin�a.� and cosi co�su�ar�ptzozzs; t�affic <br />concerns ou�lin�d by staff and his preseniation a� the bench of possible solutiQns for ri��t- <br />in/righ�-aut so��tio�zs anta Cleveland Avenue and relacation a� aceess fi.iz�:ex from t�e <br />intersecl�an; modifications to the proposed c�nter isla�d and his willingness to d��cr �:o <br />stai'�s recomrnendatians; and his only point of access nn Cleve�and Aver�ue at this tim�, <br />whether future plans :for co�stz•uction o�Twin La�es Parkway and/or Mo�nt Ridge Raad <br />cozx�e ta �ru�tia�n. M�. Liva�gston advzsed that, if the Czty Cau�ca� so di�reeted, he wfluld <br />comp�e�e � traific study; l�owever he opined that the AUAR trafiic analysis was sufficient <br />and accurately prajected tr�f�'ic loads wi�hin t�e scope of �his project. <br />10.8 Co�missioner Boerzgter expxessed �zs diff culty regarding this applicatio�, and previous <br />applicat�orns t�iat wexe approved based on concep� pians �it�i sim�lar levels a£ detail. He <br />noted tl�at �he proposed plan's layout seemed consistent with this type of project, creatinr� <br />of one specifc parcel for ha�ellrestaurant development, and B-6 o��'ice �ark district uses. <br />He ac�cnawled�ed hxs desire tp see �axe deta�l, az�d was ca�cezraed w�t� t�e rig�t-zn/right- <br />out, questioned wha1: impact the project would have on Clevelar�d Avenue, opining �hat it <br />would probably have less i�pact thai other po�ential devela��ents �referred for the Twin <br />Lakes az�ea. Corzaz�aissia�e� Baerigtex noted t�at while z�aodi�catiaz�s ��ay be needed az� <br />the proposed aceess, there were na oth.er option� currentl� available io the applicant since <br />the z�aads d�dn't e�ist yet. He further api�ed ��at ifi was �at in �he Cifiy's l�est interest �o <br />say "no" to develapment; a�c� that he was inclined to allaw the projec� conc�pt to move <br />forward, with a need fnr fi�r�he:r resol�tion of outstanding desig� iss�es; arid given t�e <br />single site, how they could address thase itez�s ic�enti�'ied by staff in thei:r Checl�lists in <br />Seetion 9.3 of the staf�'report. <br />45 I 0.9 The Plannin� Cammission voted (4-2) to reeamrnend DENTAL of �he request by C��t <br />46 V�ntures and A�West Devela�ment LLG based a� t�e absence a�pertxne�t iz�fonna�:ion <br />47 n�cessary as iden�ifed in Sec�ion 9.3 o�t�e projec� report dated Juzae 6, 2007. <br />�'F47-021_RGA_0618Q7 Page 1� of 11 <br />