Laserfiche WebLink
<br />In response to Commissioner Barker, Mr. Hufton stated that the increased floor area gained <br />from eliminating part of the three-car garage would be put back into living space. He noted, <br />however, that they would prefer leaving the garages as designed. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wright commented that he does not see how the three-car garage could be so <br />easily and arbitrarily changed to a two-car garage without drastically changing the design of <br />the building. And if this is a design review approval, the CommissJon is not really <br />reviewing the end product. Mr. Iserson concurred stating that a condition would so state that <br />the applicant must convert a three-car garage into a two-car garage and additional living area <br />and to make modifications to the design subject to the approval of staff. <br /> <br />In response to Chairman Lutz, the sold signs on the lots do not mean that PanCal has buyers <br />for the houses. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED <br /> <br />Commissioner Hovingh is somewhat reluctant to make any changes to this project because of <br />the original difficult process to arrive at an acceptable project. Since the applicant agreed to <br />changing two of the five models to two-car garages, he would support the change and <br />approval of the application. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wright concurs with Commissioner Hovingh except for the garage issue, and <br />he would like to approve the project deleting Condition 4. <br /> <br />Commissioner Barker agrees with deleting the condition requiring two-car garages for two <br />models. Staff concurred with her request for a condition prohibiting the same color scheme <br />be used on side-by-side houses. <br /> <br />Commissioner McGuirk is in favor of the two-car garage in two models. <br /> <br />Chairman Lutz can't see much accomplishment by requiring two models being converted to <br />two-car garages. He will support the three-car garages. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wright motioned, seconded by Commissioner Barker, making the PUD <br />findings for the proposed major modifications to the development plan and <br />recommending approval of the PUD major modification, Case PUD-90-18-1M to the <br />City Council subject to the conditions of approval listed in Exhibit B. <br /> <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br />A YES: Commissioners Barker, Hovingh, Wright and Chairman Lutz <br />NOES: Commissioner McGuirk <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br /> <br />Page 15 <br /> <br />October 25, 1995 <br />