PC 02/24/99 - Laserfiche WebLink

flexibility on the site lighting with the final lighting plan to be worked out with staff, and allowing deferred payment for the property's share of utility undergrounding costs. In conclusion, he noted that staff is very pleased with the design of the building, and staff's recommendation is that the Commission find that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment and adopt a resolution approving the attached draft Negative Declaration; find that the project has a De Minimis environmental impact; reconunend that the proposed PUD development plan is consistent with the purposes of the PUD ordinance; and adopt a resolution recommending approval of Case PUD-98-22 to the City Council, subject to the conditions shown in Exhibit "B." Discussion ensued relating to density in the downtown areas PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Richard Dart, architect, noted the configuration of the lot as being very long and narrow. He noted that the applicant owns the adjacent apartment building which will be eliminated in the future with a campus being located on the two properties with a sewer line down the middle of the property. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Commissioner Kameny stated that the design of the project is very attractive. He expressed concern with whether this project is the best use for the site and with there being 13-feet between the project and the apartment buildings. He noted that the apartment residents' sunlight and views will be affected due to the height and proximity of the building. He suggested that the proposed building be relocated to the west and the sewer easement be relocated to the east. In conclusion, he stated that the proposed building is too massive for the site. Discussion ensued relating to the various altematives plans that were examined for the site, and the apartment building being removed in the future. Commissioner Maas expressed concurrence with Commissioner Kameny's statements. She further expressed concem with the height of the building and the closest building being 22-and-a-half feet in size, and the massiveness of proposed project. She noted this is a difficult piece of property to develop and that the design of the building is aesthetically pleasing. Discussion ensued relating to the height of the building not being reduced due to its Victorian design, reducing FAR to eliminate massiveness of the building, setbacks for property, height of other buildings in the area, possible relocation of the building, and height of the fence. PUBLIC HEARING REOPENED Robert Cordtz, 262 West Angela, spoke in favor of the project being approved. Mr. Dart noted the fence is seven feet high and that bathroom windows are facing the project. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 9 February 24, 1999