Laserfiche WebLink
Commission Ritter stated that the thing he liked most about this project is that there are <br />no objectors present other than maybe staff bringing up some good points. He <br />commended the applicants for going out and doing the neighborhood meetings, which <br />makes it a little easier on the Commission. <br />Commissioner Piper stated that she has mixed feelings on a few things, but the one <br />area that she just wanted to touch on is that a lot of people compared this project with <br />the Ivy Lane project, and she did not think this occurred at the neighborhood at all. She <br />indicated that it is a different type of homeowner and does not see it as comparable and <br />is not comfortable with that, other than the actual physical structure itself, as it sounds <br />like it is the same floor plan. <br />Commissioner Piper agreed with most everyone that there should be something more <br />substantial for an amenity. She noted that what the City typically does with <br />neighborhoods is put in a park or something a little bit more substantial than what is <br />offered here. <br />With regard to the site layout, Commissioner Piper stated that from the business <br />perspective, the developers have laid this out as best as they possibly could with what <br />the property lines and the existing structures are. She noted that she is not terribly <br />disappointed around the separation of the two neighborhoods; however, she would <br />have loved to have seen a park or some gathering place between the two to connect <br />them, although it may not be possible because that is where the parking is located. <br />Commissioner Piper stated that the amenity being proposed where dogs could run <br />around is not possible because this is on a very busy street would not be fenced in. <br />She pointed out that it would not be a functional place for dogs or even for kids to run <br />around because they would be right on Valley Avenue, and it would be very unsafe. <br />Commissioner Piper stated that she loves the look of separated sidewalks and thinks it <br />would be very pretty for this particular development because there is an HOA that would <br />maintain the middle section, and the neighborhood would always look clean. She <br />noted, however, that as Ms. Hardy had brought up, a monolithic sidewalk would provide <br />a safer surface like concrete to step on upon stepping out the open door of a car parked <br />on the street. She indicated that she is torn on the sidewalk part but that she certainly <br />likes the canopy trees as well. <br />Commissioner Piper stated that overall, she did not like the lot sizes being as small as <br />they are, and the FAR being so tight. She noted, however, that it makes sense to her <br />as there is a relatively good demand for low maintenance in today's market. <br />Chair Allen stated that as Commissioner O'Connor mentioned, she is generally opposed <br />to applications that rezone residential land right now in a situation where the City has <br />exceeded its RHNA numbers unless there are overriding circumstances, and she thinks <br />this project meets the test of overriding circumstances so a residential project is fine <br />with her. She explained that the overriding circumstances are that when she talked to <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 12, 2015 Page 16 of 34 <br />