07/14/1981 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

? ? PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 14, 1981 PAGE 3 discussion R. Bugala withdrew his motion; Mrs. Brown agrees. J. Prokasy moved to refer the National City Bank Branch at West 231st to the Architectural Board of Review, seconded by J. Roberts, and unanimously approved. The Commission ques- tioned why the sidewalk on the east side of the drug store had been eliminated. This deletion was apparently approved by the BZD Committee of Council. IV. NEW DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISIONS: (1) Country Club Blvd. right-of-way at Great Nortihern Blvd. proposed improvement of Country Club Blvd. by construction of a median strip 1000' west of Great Northern Blvd. to Great Northern Blvd. Assistant City Engineer D. McDermott explained the proposal and advised that the Engineering Department was in favor of the plans since it would slow down traffic and they would like to see it extended another 2000' to meet the existing median on the older part of Country Club Blvd. R. Koons representing Great Northern partnership advised that after street lighting plang and plans for the development of the land on the south side of the boulevard are completed, the median will be continued. In the meantime this portion will be striped. At present the median will be planted with grass and at a later date trees will be planted. J. Prokasy moved that the Planning Commission approve the proposed im- provement of Country Club Blvd. and refer it to Council, seconded by J. Brown, and unanimously approved. (2) Deerpath Subdivision No. 6 Preliminary Plan (Revised) Located north of I-480 and east of the existing eastern end of Elm Road. Sixteen (16) sublots proposed, and in- cludes a proposed extension and realignment of Elm Road within the development site, and terminating with one (1) cul-de-sac. Note that this plan is similar to, but revised from, the proposed plan reviewed and rejected by Planning Commission on June 23, 1981. Assistant City Engineer D. McDermott advised that the only change from the plan submitted on June 23rd is that the boundry line of sublot 16 was removed so that now sublot 16 encompasses the entire block "C" of the previous.plan thus eliminating the land-locked block "C" which was the basis for rejection at the last meeting. Law Director M. Gareau stated that it should be noted that if, in fact, this particular proposal is approved that the record should clearly reflect that parcel 16 is being included in the subdivision with the full and complete understanding that no self-created hard- ship in the future is going to establish a right to sub- divide into lots and put in a street. He stated that this looks like phase development and there should be complete