Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes <br />Planning Commission <br />June 24, 1987 <br />Commissioner Tarver then asked the applicant to explain the <br />conflict between staff and the applicant. Mr. Frechette <br />complied. <br />Jim Coburn, 18 Grey Eagle Court, commended staff on their report. <br />Mr. Coburn felt a new compromise is asking too much. Chairman <br />Lindsey asked Mr. Coburn if the surrounding homeowners are <br />satisfied with tYie approval granted by City Council concerning <br />this particular lot. Mr. Coburn said that generally they <br />accpeted that compromise even though it was not what was desired. <br />Commissioner Mahern asked why Mr. Coburn prefers the approved pad <br />over the proposal. Mr. Coburn expressed concerns with grading, <br />closeness of the construction to the trees. The house was <br />previously to have been farther to the north. The originally <br />approved house pad was much lower. Further, it was represented <br />there would not be houses anywhere in these areas. Originally it <br />was presented that the choice is to put a house or water tank on <br />this site and the residents elected to have a house put on this <br />lot given a choice. <br />Mr. Quaglia explained the slopes which would result from approval <br />of this building pad. Mr. Quaglia explained the original <br />topographical map was incorrect, therefore, when staff reviewed <br />this proposal, it was compared to road location and proposed <br />lines only. There is basically a difference of at least 30' <br />regardless of the topos. <br />Commissioner stated the first approval allowed 10,000 cubic yards <br />of dirt, how much would be moved under the new approval. The <br />architect responded that the new project would be 1500-1600 cubic <br />yards. <br />Chairman Lindsey asked Mr. Coburn if there would be anything <br />gained should this application be continued so that he could <br />discuss the issues with the applicant. Mr. Coburn stated that, <br />personally, he wouldn't compromise, but was only speaking for <br />himself. He couldn't see that anything would be gained. <br />Mr. Coburn stated that even with the City Council approved plan, <br />the applicants didn't adhere to that and were putting plans <br />through the Building Department which were not as approved. <br />Commissioner Tarver asked Mr. Coburn how he would feel about <br />going to the original plan. Mr. Coburn said his concern is not <br />so much with the driveway as it would be with the hill plan and <br />grading which would take place on the top of the hill. <br />Mr. Coburn indicated no other compromises are possible from his <br />standpoint. <br />Commissioner Mahern then discussed the proposal with Mr. Coburn. <br />Commissioner Michelotti pointed out that this particular plan <br />would call for less grading than the original one as far as dirt <br />moved is concern. Mr. Coburn said that statement applies only to <br />the driveway. <br />- 8 - <br />r_ <br />