My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3/17/1992
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1992
>
3/17/1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:03:31 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 11:19:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
03/17/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
61
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
GSA 0 1992 <br />BOOK '' <br />0 <br />about encroachments into residential neighborhoods, but this would <br />take only 17.5 feet from a 349 ft. buffer that is shown in their <br />site plan for open space and stormwater retention area. <br />Commissioner Scurlock felt the net result would be that they <br />would gain enough space for an additional 80 parking spaces, and <br />wished to point out that the gas station would be a highly <br />intensive use and a peak use in that location. <br />Mr. Richardson commented that generally an out -parcel gas <br />station provides for one-stop shopping. In order words, people in <br />the shopping center would not have to go back out onto SR -60 to <br />find a gas station. <br />Mr. Luethje advised that they would be putting in deceleration <br />lanes on SR -60. <br />Commissioner Bird felt that it may be that you could better <br />accommodate the traffic intensity and flow generated by a gas <br />station in a shopping center type of situation than you could in a <br />stand-alone parcel. Obviously, the major tenants going in on the <br />back of the property must not think a gas station would be a <br />negative use to have in their front yard. <br />Director Keating advised that staff is looking at these issues <br />in the order in which they have to be looked at. Staff has looked <br />at the potential rezoning and drafted an agenda item, but it has <br />not yet gone to the Planning & Zoning Commission, so there is no <br />recommendation to bring to the Board on the matter. In addition, <br />staff has had pre -application meetings with the applicant on the <br />site plan, and traffic control, overall traffic generation and <br />level of service are major considerations in the site plan process. <br />There are a lot of issues that staff is looking at, but we have not <br />yet come up with any specific recommendations to the Board on all <br />these issues. <br />Commissioner Bowman emphasized that particular intersection <br />already is a very hairy intersection. It is especially bad for <br />people who are trying to make a left turn going west. There is no <br />way you can see around the traffic that is stacked up on the west <br />side of the intersection. <br />Chairman Eggert felt the Board had discussed this matter very <br />thoroughly at the February 25 meeting and there is a procedure they <br />are going through. Each of us expressed ourselves on how we felt <br />about the agreement with the condition. She didn't feel any <br />differently; she still felt we should buy the right-of-way, but <br />that it should be processed through our regular procedures. <br />Director Keating advised that right now everything is on hold <br />because the rezoning cannot be considered until the additional <br />property is acquired. The node is at its maximum size right now, <br />M <br />M <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.