Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes <br />Planning Commission <br />August 26, 1987 <br />Rebuttal <br />Mr. Inderbitzen stated they attempted to contact everybody who <br />was interested, especially contacted Mr. Milt Jones because he <br />knew he was in contact with everybody. Mr. Inderbitzen couldn't <br />explain why the residents of the area didn't know 15 acres of the <br />Spotorno property was Low Density Residential. Mr. Inderbitzen <br />never brought it up at meetings because it was not the issue at <br />hand. Mr. Inderbitzen reported that Mr. Spotorno would object to <br />down zoning of his 15 acre Low Density acreage. <br />Commissioner Hoyt asked when the 15 acres was made Low Density <br />Residential. Mr. Swift stated it is staff's understanding after <br />the extensive hearings by the Residential Review Committee, the <br />result was to leave the Happy Valley Area as it existed on the <br />General Plan. In 1964 Livingston and Blaney did the General Plan <br />for the City and it was Low Density Residential at that time. <br />Mr. Swift then explained the effects of development of 160 acres <br />Rural Density Residential with no development on slopes of 25% or <br />greater. <br />Commissioners Hoyt, Michelotti, and Tarver then discussed <br />development potential of the subject site considering the <br />topography of the land. <br />Mr. Inderbitzen stated that the Low Density Residential <br />designation has been existence for a very long time. The <br />discussion really only covers approximately 145 acres of the <br />Spotorno property. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Michelotti, seconded by <br />Commissioner Berger to recommend approval of the Negative <br />Declaration prepared for Case GP-87-4 inasmuch as approval of the <br />application would have an insignificant adverse effect on the <br />environment. <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br />AYES: Commissioners Berger, Hoyt, Michelotti, Tarver, and <br />Chairman Lindsey <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br />Resolution No. PC-87-91 was entered and adopted recommending <br />approval of the negative declaration prepared for Case GP-87-4 as <br />motioned. <br />Commissioner Hoyt stated that the Residential Review Committee <br />wanted the subject property to stay "as is." It was assumed that <br />the property had only one land use designation. Rural Density <br />Residential would still be in conformance with the intention of <br />the Residential Review Committee. Chairman Lindsey reiterated <br />that it was assumed by the Residential Review Committee that the <br />entire 160 acres was to remain 1/unit per 5 acres. Chairman <br />Lindsey then asked if there were any other properties in the <br />- 4 - <br /> <br />