Laserfiche WebLink
<br />happy to see the mix that has evolved. She liked the project and support it. However, <br />she would stress the addition of a kitchen in a meeting room or fa ility for each area. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wright also commended Signature Properties for th project. He felt that <br />Area C makes the project complete and would support approval fo the entire project. <br /> <br />Commissioner Mahern stated that she echoes the rest of the Comm ssion. She favored the <br />density of Area C as proposed by the applicant, and felt that Area completed the project. <br />She liked the architecture and landscaping. She did feel that the c ditions or the CC&R's <br />should disclose what the density of the entire project is so that horn buyers are completely <br />aware. In regard to the indoor recreation room she felt the project had sufficient amenities <br />without it, and that the neighborhood park would be more than eno gh. She felt that the mix <br />of homes would be a success in Hacienda Business Park. <br /> <br />Chairman Hovingh also supported the project and the other comme ts. He did have a <br />concern about the loss of high density housing, but could support th project as it stands with <br />the modifications as recommended by the Commission, <br /> <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Mahern, seconded by Co . sioner Wright <br />recommending approval of the draft Negative Declaration prepa ed for Case PUD-81- <br />30-SSD inasmuch as project approval will not make a significant adverse impact on the <br />environment. <br /> <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br /> <br />AYES: <br /> <br />Commissioners Mahern, McGuirk, Michelot i, Wright and <br />Chainnan Hovingh <br />None <br />None <br />None <br /> <br />NOES: <br />ABSENT: <br />ABSTAIN: <br /> <br />Resolution No. PC-93-12 was entered and adopted recommending approval of the draft <br />Negative Declaration for Case PUD-81-30-SSD as motioned. <br /> <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Mahern, seconded by Co issioner Michelotti <br />making the PUn imdings for Areas A, B, and C portions of the roposed development <br />plan, as summarized in the staff report; and recommending appr val of Case PUD-81- <br />30-SSD, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit "B", modified t include approval of <br />Area C, with the following modifications: <br /> <br />o Amend Condition 27.c. to delete the addition of a ra quetball court, but <br />that a meeting room with a kitchenette be provided Areas A, B, and C; <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes February 24, 1993 <br /> <br />Page 11 <br /> <br />I <br />