Laserfiche WebLink
RCA Attachment E <br />wĻŭǒƌğƩtƌğƓƓźƓŭ/ƚƒƒźƭƭźƚƓaĻĻƷźƓŭ <br />aźƓǒƷĻƭΑ‘ĻķƓĻƭķğǤͲbƚǝĻƒĬĻƩЋͲЋЉЋЋ <br />tğŭĻБ <br />323 Member McGehee asked if she could amend her motion. <br />324 <br />325 Member Kruzel indicated when explained differently it changes this because her <br />326 assumption was this was going automatically to the higher number of units but it is <br />327 not, there is a cap. <br />328 <br />329 Member McGehee explained the Commission can make a cap by including it in the <br />330 motion. In this particular case one of the conditions is that the number of units does <br />331 not exceed seventy-two. <br />332 <br />333 Mr. Lloyd indicated that was correct. He was contemplating the prospect of having a <br />334 condition of approval that prevents somebody from doing a thing that the Zoning <br />335 Code allows them to do by right and that is a little less than comfortable for him. <br />336 <br />337 Member Kruzel agreed and did not think that would work. <br />338 <br />339 Mr. Lloyd explained Ms. Gundlach did some quick math and came up with thirty <br />340 units an acre with the ability to use the density bonus can get to the seventy-two units. <br />341 <br />342 Member McGee thought the motion could be amended to state thirty units per acre. <br />343 <br />344 Member Aspnes thought if they were going to seventy-two because they thought the <br />345 City services can support seventy-two, the jump to eighty-six is not huge in her mind, <br />346 it is marginal. Once it gets to seventy-two, how much bigger is the impact to it. The <br />347 site as it stands would support fifty-seven without any approval needed. <br />348 <br />349 Mr. Lloyd indicated that was correct and affirmed that at a certain point requiring <br />350 fewer units the project goes away entirely. Of the projects that have come to staffÓs <br />351 attention for this site over the last few years, this is far and away the smallest and the <br />352 least number of units. That is testament to the fact that there is a minimum number of <br />353 units that need to be built in order to have a project that can function and be built in <br />354 the first place. <br />355 <br />356 Chair Kimble noted the amount in the staff report states thirty-six units per acre and <br />357 she wondered if that should be thirty units per acre. <br />358 <br />359 Mr. Paschke indicated it is what is shown in the staff report, thirty-six units per acre. <br />360 <br />361 Chair Kimble wanted to make sure everyone was clear about the motion in order to <br />362 make a motion. <br />363 <br />364 Member Kruzel felt she understood what the developer was saying that it was not <br />365 feasible to not have it larger and the Commission talked about trusting the reports <br />366 about the traffic study but her biggest concern was the traffic and the pedestrians. If <br />367 that all can work then increasing the number works for her after more clarification. <br />368 She indicated she would withdraw her second to the motion. <br />369 <br />Page 7 of 13 <br /> <br />