PC 03/10/82 - Laserfiche WebLink

Tom Terrill, Reynolds and Brown, addressed the Commission. He said this plan does conform to the previously approved PUD and that there are no major changes. He said that with regard to condition number 6 they have already entered into an agreement with the City with reference to this matter. He addressed the level of service "E". He said this should not occur with the mitigation measures imposed and he certainly would not like to have his project jeopardized by that level of service. He stated with regard to the lot coverage, they have been up front with the City on this and this current project is no different than the previous PUD or Design Review Board approvals. Commissioner Wilson asked what stage of development the project is in. Mr. Terrill explained the first buildings will be on the south side of Owens Court fronting on the north side of the Meyer property. Commissioner Jamieson asked what would be next. Mr. Terrill said the market would be dictating subsequent development. Mr. Terrill said the interest now appears to be for offices and research and development. Commissioner Jamieson asked about PUD-80-14 and would that include all of the buildings unmarked on the plan. Mr. Terrill stated that the shaded areas on the site plan were buildings approved under the first PUD. Shel Richman, 15572 Hacienda Heights, representing the Meyer property spoke. He presented proposed conditions for the Commission to con- sider. He further expressed concerns with Level "E" traffic and the suggestion that this would only be reached if the Meyer project is built. He said the logic of this escapes him. He said they have been concerned for over a year that the opening of Street "B", Bannister, from the Meyer to the Reynolds and Brown property will cause a 14,000 sq. ft. plot to be unbuildable. He stated that his company wants compensation for the use of their property as well as the signals required. He wanted to know when and how much the Reynolds and Brown people would compensate them. He said a signal would also have to be put in at Stoneridge and Denker and stated that now is the time to come to grips with the problem. He asked the Commission to consider a fixed payment to be stipulated before processing the Reynolds and Brown property. He said that an increase of traffic caused by the Reynolds and Brown development has caused their streets to be wider. He urged the Commission to assist in compensation for this. He further stated that he has noted that condition number 58 relating to the water study has been omitted and asked why. Mr. Harris stated this has been added to other approvals for Reynolds and Brown. Mr. Richman asked if this condition has been satisfied. Mr. Harris indicated that condition number 58 has been eliminated as it has already been applied to on other approvals. -11- _..__._._..__. _. _ .. __~--_._.... . _... .......,._ ..... ........_.. ..._._.. .. .._._ _,.. r