PC 081402 - Laserfiche WebLink

.-. Commissioner Kameny moved to approve PUD-20 as recommended by staff. Commissioner Roberts seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Commissioners Arkin, Kameny, Maas, and Roberts None Commissioner Sullivan None Resolution No. PC-2002-50 and PC-2002-51 were entered and adopted as motioned. The Planning Commission recessed for a break at 8:07 p.m. Chairperson Maas reconvened the meeting at 8:15 p.m. c. PUD-02-3M and PCUP-61, Bernal Partners, L.L.C. Application for PUD Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit approval of a self-service gasoline station consisting of six fuel pumps, a 2,500 square foot quick-service restaurant with drive-through lane, and a modification to the Bernal Properties PUD Development Plan to allow a 1,300-square-foot drive-through carwash, and alcoholic beverage sales from the convenience market, on an approximately 1.3-acre site located at 1875 Valley Avenue (southeast corner of Bernal Avenue and the Valley Avenue extension). The subject property is zoned PUD (Planner Unit Development) - C-O (Commercial and Office). ........ Marion Pavan summarized the staff report. He noted that this project was reviewed extensively at a work session before the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission provided to the applicant and staff directions with respect to building design, operations, and uses. He described the various facets of the project, and noted that staff supported the modifications of the development plan. Staff believed there were benefits to a self-service carwash in terms of potential water conservation because the water will be recycled. Mr. Pavan noted that while the market would sell beer and wine, it would not sell hard liquor. If the sale of beer and wine became problematic to the community, that issue could be brought before the Planning Commission to rescind it. He noted that the employees would be trained to spot inebriated operators and act accordingly. Mr. Pavan noted that the building design was commented upon very vigorously by the Planning Commission. Staff believed that the applicant did an excellent job is listening to and responding to the Commission's comments, and staff supported the project as proposed. He stated that the plan was peer reviewed by Larry Cannon, who noted that it was a nice design. He suggested several small modifications to the design, such as deeper .-- PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 14, 2002 Page 8