Laserfiche WebLink
Chair Ritter: Sure. <br />Commissioner Allen: All right. So my motion would be that we require.... actually, my <br />motion is that this project be returned and be redesigned such that it achieve .... or, <br />support approving the project PUD assuming that it is able to achieve a maximum FAR <br />of 40% and a building height of 30 feet per lot, and not an average blended, but rather <br />that the maximum be 40% and the height be 30 feet and if that can be accomplished, <br />I'm in support of this PUD. Now, I recognize that may involve redesigning some of the <br />homes. I don't know what's involved with that, but that would be my motion. <br />Chair Ritter: I'm not in favor of returning it back. I'm in favor of making a tweak a little. <br />Commissioner Nagler: Is there a coincidence between the FARs being over 40% and <br />those homes that have bonus rooms planned? Or, are there reasons or explanations <br />that they exceed 40% beyond the addition of the bonus room? <br />Commissioner O'Connor: So if the bonus rooms were eliminated, would they all make <br />the 40 %? <br />Commissioner Nagler: Yes, that's the question. <br />Schroeder: There'd still be a few lots over the 40% without the bonus room, but I'd like <br />to point out again to you that the Nolan Farms project which is as new as parts of Cindy <br />Way, there are 7 houses well over 40% in that subdivision as well as some that are <br />fractionally over 40% on top of that. So it's not like everything out there has been 40 %. <br />That was a PUD as well and so I think that you have the flexibility to do that with specific <br />projects that have good design. So we did try to address that issue and in looking at <br />those, this is something we printed out years ago. We used this to say, okay, we can be <br />over 40% on some of the lots and we have the ability to get to 40% on average, so <br />that's I think reasonable. One of these houses was actually built in another subdivision <br />on a smaller lot than these in a PUD project, but this house has been modified. It's got <br />different elevations and the floor plan's a little bit different, but it's been seen before with <br />the bonus room. <br />Commissioner O'Connor: So again, how many of the lots now that have the bonus room <br />that's causing it to go over 40 %? <br />Schroeder: So Plan 2 on some of the lots is over 40% without the bonus room. <br />Commissioner Allen: So how many would be over 40% if you didn't have bonus rooms. <br />Schroeder: Well on this table, if you plot a Plan 2 on every lot, 9 of the lots would be <br />over 40 without a bonus room. <br />Commissioner Allen: Okay, and 11 with a bonus room? Is that right? <br />Schroeder: I think it's.... <br />Commissioner O'Connor: So it wouldn't be at 45% but it would be over 40 %. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 23, 2016 Page 22 of 46 <br />