My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
HUTTON CENTRE
Clerk
>
Contracts / Agreements
>
H
>
HUTTON CENTRE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2012 2:58:11 PM
Creation date
10/16/2006 5:16:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Contracts
Company Name
Hutton Centre
Contract #
A-1990-030
Agency
Planning & Building
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
56
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />. <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />-- <br /> <br />Miller questioned if he knew what type of chemicals would be Used by <br />the County. Mr. Bellavia stated that he did not; however, they do <br />comply with Air Quality. Further discussion related to the <br />requirement to report anything on the APA list before receiving <br />bUilding permits, and reporting to the Fire Department any change or <br />wrong chemical used. <br /> <br />Commissioner Godinez made a motion to recommend that the City Council <br />approve Amendment Application No. 1036 and Specific Development Plan <br />No. 55 as conditioned through the operational standards; and recommend <br />that the City Council approve Development Agreement No. 90-1. The <br />motion was seconded by Commissioner Mills. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sizemore reiterated his Concerns for having two, <br />eight-story buildings and an eight-story garage adjacent to <br />single-family residences and much smaller multi-family residential; <br />for inconsistencies in this project and area and the concern the <br />Commission had shown for the Minnie Street area; for having a negative <br />declaration on an EIR; for waiting until pulling building permits to <br />see what kind of toxic chemicals were going to be used; and the facts <br />that we really don't know how much traffic there will be or what kind <br />of pollutants will be put in the air. He also pointed out that the <br />City has a poor record for going back and correcting something, and <br />with the County. He referred to the old Buffum's building which now <br />holds a Superior Court, dealing with felonies. He was in opposition <br />to the applications and the motion; they were not in the public <br />interest. Although it could be a good project, there were too many <br />unknowns. <br /> <br />The motion carried on the following vote: <br /> <br />AYES: <br />NOES: <br />ABSENT: <br /> <br />Miller, Mills, Godinez, Hanna <br />Casteix, Sizemore <br />Spevacek <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.