Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Planning Commission Minutes <br /> <br />-8- <br /> <br />2. The structure is out of character with the houses in the neighborhood. <br /> <br />3. There was a lack of communication between the developer and the neighbors. <br /> <br />Dressler moved and Johnson seconded that the Planning Commission recommend <br />denial of C. R. Hakworthy's request for rezoning, division of lot, and variance <br />at l71 Center Street. <br /> <br />The motion to deny was superseded by a motion to continue. <br /> <br />DeBenedet indicated something creative is needed for the subject property. <br />Single family development will not work here. He suggested the application <br />be continued to allow the applicant to re-design the proposal based on comments <br />by the Commission and the neighbors. <br /> <br />Johnson indicated she has 2 concerns: <br /> <br />1. Lack of communication between the developer and the neighbors. <br /> <br />2. The R-l/R-2 interface is a sensitive one. There is too much traffic <br />and the development is too intense for this area. <br /> <br />Wiski indicated there are many chan~es which can be made to get to a good <br />solution. Building height, access, and number of units can all be re-examined. <br /> <br />Recommendation <br /> <br />DeBenedet moved and Berry seconded that the Planning Commission continue <br />C. R. Hakworthy's request for rezoning, division of lot, and variance at <br />171 Center Street to the October 3, 1984 regular Planning Commission meeting <br />to allow the applicant to talk to the neighbors and to design a better solution. <br />Roll calls, Ayes: Johnson, Dressler, Moeller, Berry, DeBenedet, and Wiski. <br />Nays: none. <br /> <br />Other Business <br /> <br />DeBenedet indicated he wants all applications to include the full range of <br />information required in the ordinances so that the Commission can make well- <br />informed decisions. <br /> <br />Johnson suggested that the Commission should not get too technical. They should <br />rely on the staff for technical review. <br /> <br />Dahlgren suggested that the Planning Commission review concepts rather than <br />technical details. <br /> <br />Johnson indicated she feels the Commission's role is to make general land use <br />determinations rather than getting involved in technical details. <br /> <br />DeBenedet indicated he deals ivith technical engineering details for a living, <br />and doesn't want anything to slip through the cracks. <br />