Laserfiche WebLink
he did not have a quorum vote of approval from the Assn. He <br />said as few as nine people could approve of his plan. He said <br />he has seen nothing in writing that there must be 213 of 2B. He <br />stated that he had 19 approved votes for his plan and felt that <br />the CC&R's were being blatantly rejected. He commented about a <br />so-called "Phantom" plan of which he appeared to not know the <br />origin. He stated he knew grading was the issue and felt that <br />this should go back to the staff to be worked out. <br />Chairman Hoyt reminded Mr. Black that he was repeating himself <br />and that he should be brief. <br />Mr. Black finalized his comments by saying that he would work <br />diligently to iron out any details and problems. He requested <br />approval for the proposed plan presented tonight. <br />The public hearing was closed. <br />Commissioner Mahern asked <br />opinion was regarding the <br />Attorney has not reviewed <br />Planning Commission can a~ <br />Homeowner's Assn. has not <br />Assn. can approve if the <br />tonight the issue was to <br />plan. <br />Mr. Swift what the City Attorney"s <br />CC&R's. Mr. Swift said the City <br />them. He said that basically the <br />prove the proposed plan even if the <br />approved. Likewise, the Homeowner's <br />Commission does not. He stated that <br />decide whether or not it was a good <br />Commissioner Berger stated that after hearing the testimony <br />tonight she felt she could not support the proposed plan and <br />that something needed to be worked out regarding the grading. <br />Commissioner Tarver felt there was much emotion and much history <br />that had to be sorted through to get to the facts. He felt the <br />proposed plan tonight might have slightly better grading. <br />However, he felt the homeowners had valid reasons and felt their <br />view would be interrupted. He said he would like to see them <br />alI meet and work out the problems. He felt the issues should <br />be worked out before he could support it. <br />Commissioner Mahern felt the proposed plan was a better plan, <br />but felt the PUD rules and regulations had to be abided by. She <br />could not support the applicant tonight. <br />Commissioner Hovingh thought the approved plan was a better one <br />to stay with. <br />Chairman Hoyt felt the initial plan might be best; he found it <br />difficult to support any increased grading. Given the <br />information tonight, he said he could back the original plan but <br />cannot support tonight's proposed plan. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Berger, seconded by <br />Commissioner Mahern denying Case PUD-82-10-SM. <br />Page 5 <br />