Laserfiche WebLink
.t <br /> Page 3 <br /> John Cheshire continued by pointing out Donna Lane road layout. He said that a <br /> professional engineer had taken a look at this. He-further explained about the <br /> islands and that they were Wide, ample, one way read Frith "do not enter" signs. <br /> There were some grading and-drainage adjustments made with a copy-gi en to <br /> Charlie. <br /> Matt asked Charlie if he had any comments. Charlie said that he had met ► rith <br /> them and reviewed these changes and adjustments. John continued by talking <br /> about their de-nitrification system and hover they will plant with native grass mix, <br /> using different m ture on slopes. He said there were no changes made to <br /> wetlands or wastewater treatment system. He s.howed a plan profile of Connector <br /> Road. He noted that all puns were revised and dated g 1 g 1. <br /> Special Permit was handed out by Tom Fud la. The following items were <br /> d iscussed a. <br /> Date changes on plans to be filled in; language for paring lot and driveways; <br /> waive granted for setbacks and lot size requirements; procedure for issuing <br /> permits for buildings-within structure. <br /> There was some discussion about Design Review wanting to see all signs, <br /> including whenever there is a tenant change. Don Mega hlin did not think this <br /> was a good idea and asked that this be changed. It was decided to leave this <br /> issue in draft the way it is. <br /> The possibility of future problems regarding crosswalks and a provision in <br /> Condition # . It was decided to drop the first sentence ire Condition ## . <br /> Discussion turned to traffic control signal. Once again' this became a subject of <br /> differing opinion and debate. Don said that he had tried to resolve these issues <br /> and that the project was being unnecessarily held up by it. He said he Would like <br /> to have phrasing that recognizes regulatory enforcement power. Tom mentioned <br /> some financial considerations: including interest that may be available. He <br /> thought that the figure of 200K may have to be looked at again. Don explained <br /> that the signal itself would cost 130K plus the interconnect-costs of 70K. David <br /> Soltiel mentioned that 2 oK with interest should be part of the security <br /> performance guarantee. <br /> Matt inquired about a time limit for posting state approval. Charlie wondered if, in <br /> seven to eight years from now 200K would still cover the cost. Lengthy <br /> discussion followed. Matt suggested that if the state-hasn't acted in three years, <br /> the cost should be reviewed. <br />