Laserfiche WebLink
. I ^»PBUOART 16, 1988MiaUTlS OF THB PIAMHIHG COMMISSIOM NBBTIHG <br />«1218 SNITH/DBTTLOFP COMTiaUKD <br />Attorney Berg stated that the cold weather has prevented <br />them from resolving the septic system issue. He felt <br />the Planning Commission could approve the preliminary <br />subdivision subject to requiring the septic system be <br />moved if found to be encroaching the lot line. <br />Bellows noted that proof that an acceptable septic site <br />exists on every parcel is required for a subdivision, of <br />which no testing on Lot 1 has been done to verify this, <br />and the promise to move it cannot be made without the <br />knowledge that an alternate site is available. <br />Attorney Callahan stated that if Planning Commission <br />feels that the septic system issue must be resolved <br />prior to making a recommendation, he requests that this <br />matter be tabled until adequate information is <br />available. He noted that he is also concerned about the <br />lot line/access problem. <br />It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Bellows, to table <br />this application pending resolve of the septic system <br />location on Lot 1. Motion, Ayes 5, Mays 1. Johnson <br />voted nay stating he found no problem with giving <br />conditional approval of the preliminary subdivision. <br />*1240 MAFMtUt DAIRY QOBBH <br />3574 SBOSBLIHB DRIVB <br />COMBRCIAL BITS FLAM REVIEW/ <br />VARIAflCE/COHDITIOBRL USB PERMIT <br />aMTIWQATIOE OF PUBLIC HEARIM6 8:06-8(18 <br />Rick Plalsted was present for this matter. <br />Jacobs explained the revised proposal for a drive- <br />thru/pick up station addition on the west side of <br />building and moving the garage storage area further <br />north on the property. He submitted the landscape plan <br />provided by applicant which provides 20 parking stalls. <br />Jacobs stated that based on other cities parking <br />requirements, which vary, he recommended a standard for <br />thisy type of use of 1 parking stall per 60 s.f. of <br />building with a minimum of 15 parking stalls. <br />Bellows noted that 5 (#1,2,3,10,16) of the proposed 20 <br />stalls shown on the landscape plan were not feasible <br />parking stalls. However, without these 5 stalls, the <br />plan still met the recommended 15 minimum parking <br />stalls. <br />Due to the upcoming County Rd. 15 improvements delaying <br />the final landscaping for this project, Kelley <br />recommended requiring a letter of credit for completion <br />of the landscaping.