PC 091306 - Laserfiche WebLink

and pointed out that nobody in the immediate neighborhood of the facility favored this project. Mr. Samuelian Mr. Townsend thanked the Commission for the opportunity to speak and public speakers and noted that while the opponents to this project did not want a public park, they wanted to keep an area of green space on someone else’s private property. He believed that if the Commission believed the homes were an “abomination,” as described by one speaker, it should deny the application. He encouraged the Commission to approve the application if it believed the homes were attractive and well-designed. He noted that the neighbors during the original hearing in the 1970’s had been afraid that the facility would be a terrible blight to the neighborhood, which he did not believe to be the case. He believed the proposed houses were reasonable uses of private property and that they would be similarly innocuous additions to the neighborhood. He disagreed with the characterization that the houses were being built for economic reasons and noted that an assisted living use would have a far higher return than two homes. Mr. Black noted that patient care was very important to him and that he was in this field because he cared about the patients. He noted that he would never take anything away from the patients and did not believe the house would do that. He invited the opponents to this project to visit the facility at any time. He did not believe that patient care had anything to do with these two houses and believed that Generations Healthcare, both the facility and the people who work there, was an asset to the community. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Blank regarding whether a proposed addition to the facility on this land would create the same debate, Ms. Decker confirmed that it would need to come before the Planning Commission as a modification to the existing use permit. Commissioner Olson agreed that this was private property, not a City park, and that there were certain rights that went along with private property. However, he found it hard to believe that when Generations Healthcare purchased this property, it did not know how it was zoned. If it contemplated building two homes on the half-acre at that time, he believed they rolled the dice in changing the zoning. When he looked at this project in June, he had wanted to see some compromise and did not believe that the property should not be built on. He noted that the square footage of these homes had remained the same since June. He noted that the conditions referred to a 40-percent FAR, without addressing square footage. He had heard various distances referred to with respect to setbacks, and noted that Condition No. 3 did not define the boundaries of the setbacks. Acting Chairperson Fox agreed with the speaker who spoke about the integrity of the planning process. She opposed this project and would support the previous Planning Commissions and City Councils. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 13, 2006 Page 16 of 23