PC 082416 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Brown: No other comments. I did have one clarification in the same arena because it always comes up. But, going from RM -1,500 to PUD high density makes no difference with the future RHNA allocations because either way, it's residential, correct? Weinstein: That's right, so again, the RHNA obligation is to zone for an adequate amount of land to build housing to accommodate our 8 year requirement set up by the regional government. This site is already designated for residential uses and it will continue to be designated for residential uses. We're playing around with the development standards a little bit with the PUD, but it doesn't change the site's basic function as a site for residential uses. So it does not affect our RHNA obligation. It's not going to change our ability to provide housing in the community. In fact, a project like this that is actually real housing construction in the City will be reported in our annual report to the state so we'll be showing that we're not only zoning land for housing but we're actually building housing in the community as well which is a good thing from the state's perspective. Commissioner O'Connor: The only thing I was disappointed to see was there was no small fence, but it showed up in the conditions of approval. So I'm good to go. Chair Ritter: I think having the workshop first was helpful. You listened to a lot of things. You worked with the neighbors on the fencing issue, disclosure agreement about the noise so they know what they're getting into. I like that, and I only had a few comments because of the workshop. Commissioner Balch: I think it's a very nice project. I took the time to actually drive by St. John and looked at both the historical building that you're relocating and I really appreciate that you put the time and energy into designing something that's as nice as this is in my opinion, and I really appreciate as staff has probably complimented you on, finding a good solution for this historical building. I know the garage issue is probably not the best for you generally, but it shows your willingness to work with staff and the desires of it and I truly appreciate that. I was a bit concerned and I did voice to staff, this isn't my favorite design of houses... I know several people who live in, I call it the "coffin" configuration because I do not like a dead -end street where a fire truck can't get down and turn around in a hammerhead type of configuration, but given the constraints of the lot, I think you guys have done a nice job and I really like the walkway which I didn't see earlier when I was talking with staff about specifically. I really appreciate the accommodation of the two visitor spots on the corner. I think they're well laid out so I generally think it's a great design. I really appreciate it. With that, I'm ready to support it. Chair Ritter: Is there a motion? Commissioner Nagler: No, hold on. A couple of things; one just a general comment and not so much about this project but to put in the public record —I think that we're going to see increasing numbers of projects that ask for PUDs on what were previously lots of single family dwellings. It's something obviously the Commission is receptive to so there's no reason why the applicants wouldn't continue to come forward with them and I'd just ask when the Downtown Specific Task Force meets and recommends an updated Downtown Plan that this specific topic of repurposing pieces of property in this PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 24, 2016 Page 10 of 39