PC 081016 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Brown said his only issue with staff's proposal is that his goal is not to want more open space but to add more units to Sunflower Hills. Mr. Beaudin asked for clarification from the Commission as to whether they want to add units to Sunflower Hill through increase of land or add units to Sunflower Hills, which is a separate PUD application with the 1.35 acres. Commissioner Brown recognized this challenge, but his point is that if staff wants the Commission to approve the 93 units, he would like a greater commitment that he will see more than 19 units in Sunflower Hills, and he said he could not design from the dais. Commissioner O'Connor asked if there was a reason why the City limited Sunflower Hills to a two -story building, and Mr. Beaudin said no, there is not a reason. Ms. Hagen noted that the two -story building was part of their original proposal, but there is no limitation on heights right now. Mr. Beaudin said he thinks it is more of an operational issue. It is a type of development and he thinks two stories operationally makes more sense, and this came across at the workshop. Chair Ritter allowed Ms. Houghton and Mr. Serpa to address comments. Ms. Houghton said Sunflower Hills would not want a three -story operation. Some children have physical issues and two stories maximize this space. There is also a direct correlation with the size of the acreage and the number of people they can house on that site. It is not about taking 1.35 acres and putting 30 people on them which cannot be done. She said their Board has already voted to not increase the density past 22 per acre. She reminded people that there are 20 people buying the homes and who will be coming over and using their site. With autism, more space is needed. Mr. Serpa stated when doing the math, when including the homes around the site, there are far more than 19 homes. They have a chance of developing this in a way where it is not done anywhere else. All of the internal agreements that have been negotiated have been an exhaustive process for them and for them to adjust the land plan at this point opens up many issues. Mr. Beaudin said the decision is up to the Planning Commission and he restated that staff simply wants to hear consensus on items and to further refine the condition which states "to work with staff prior to the City Council meeting on architecture." PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 10, 2016 Page 30 of 33