PC 09/09/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Resolution No. PC-92-78 was entered and adopted recommending ap roval of the Negative Declaration and De Minimus for Case PUD-81-30-26M/PUD-85-8-8 as motioned. A motion was made and modified by Commissioner Wright, seco McGuirk C'mding that the project is consistent with the General P C'mdings as listed, and recommending approval of the PUD major the conditions contained within Exhibit B Cor Case PUD-81-30-2 the Collowing modification: o Delete Condition 5; and ded by Commissioner n, making the PUD odification subject to PUD-85-8-8M, with o Amend Table 1 to show Site 14a as 35 percent Floo Area Ratio (FAR). ROLL CALL VOTE AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Commissioners Finch, Wright, and Chairman Hovingh Commissioners Mahern and McGuirk Commissionet Michelotti None Resolution No. PC-92-79 was entered and adopted recommending ap roval of the PUD findings for Case PUD-81-30-26M/PUD-85-8-8M as motioned. ~ A motion was made by Commissioner Wright, seconded by Co C'mding that the proposed Development Agreement is consistent w and recommend approval oC the draft Development Agreement a PUD-81-30-26M/PUD-85-8-8M. ROLL CALL VOTE AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Commissioners Finch, Wright, and Chairman Hovingh Commissioners Mahern and McGuirk Commissioner Michelotti None . ioner Finch h the General Plan, approving Case Resolution No. PC-92-80 was entered and adopted recommending ap roval of the Development Agreement for Case PUD-81-30-26M/PUD-85-8-8M as motioned. Chairman Hovingh wished to point out to Council that there was sub tial opposition from the Commission to any change in land use for Site 14a. MA TIERS CONTINUED FOR DECISION There were none. Planning Commission Minutes September 9, 1992 Page 10