Laserfiche WebLink
22 <br /> October 19,19. <br /> 011 was called with all councilmen voting yes t <br /> who voted no. <br /> Motion Carried <br /> PUBLIC NEARING(CB779-314) <br /> Continued public hearyng was held on therequest of Towne oz. <br /> Country l <br /> .fortentative 1 pFroval BayviewManor <br /> between NkilteoBoulevardand Taylor Drive. <br /> located y d theh hearing September21st and some the <br /> darecvon given to thestaff and the Planning ion by the council. <br /> hadbeenheld October 18Planning Commission. After <br /> 7 hearing <br /> ion was d 1 ed <br /> plat <br /> i3 rf h l.:addresses e f d h g <br /> sivebetter access e intersection f e of ne- 6NkelteoBoulevard: <br /> has provided for drainage and inview h ty attorney's ruling o <br /> tt the questionable act :denying 1 which is in compliancehA <br /> ethe <br /> tj oningc a and comprehensive e plan three for themotion <br /> and two again[so he motion had died feria lacko a majority. <br /> 1Eoa <br /> her member stating that he recognized t right of a property owner <br /> to subdivide his propertyb x because traffic safety Conditions <br /> • ig already unsafe intersectioni -would be <br /> dl bphysical- i h distance, <br /> ingressbecause any other is not <br /> possible recommend. Y <br /> [ city because pf is Useful ted:a <br /> d <br /> not cause ahardshipp on <br /> y et i is denied a tede <br /> • has <br /> bed tconsider evil than th .3 <br /> lots,tvemembe the plat denied. i motion h.the <br /> of three against and two for <br /> athis mo was defeated also. he <br /> decision w would be revo®vendation from the Planning <br /> Commission h p d subdivision. <br /> IIIAMr. <br /> J . k p L hutilities p had II that at <br /> a e` p side of <br /> n p so that h <br /> propertyi drained u and that a line d orbond <br /> provided it. a traffic engineer 1 statethat intersection <br /> i. at NT Sfteo Boulevard :d Bayview L s fair a . <br /> The Traffic engineering De oidia t recommend splacing ean- <br /> ti <br /> - <br /> the plattoBoulevard. For this .the <br /> plan staff recommends approval this subdivisionof 13x1 snwith <br /> 1 p he following conditions.�$ 11, 1) thatdrainae system b 11 leen b <br /> 3 V tr t adversely effectingt or downs roperries, <br /> including tion and the tight line. <br /> t <br /> ) h iew Lane to a applicant following <br /> improvements: <br /> 4 i f4feet, .i <br /> stance <br /> 3 l frompaving edge <br /> bank)along <br /> N kil ch <br /> 4bus stop a distance of 160 feet d for h 00 <br /> 1)7,v ;( Purc <br /> hase,thertvve Alof thedeveloper,11! c staff. and they 9 <br /> h intersection t <br /> ion <br /> as recommended reo1gL e that impact n <br /> other <br /> ' property <br /> James Zue of 2308 Y p d asked What <br /> the <br /> Lcost of a tight line lldeveloper a two to <br /> ry three thousand b g said h l <br /> would <br /> be approximately ten times that nt. <br />