Laserfiche WebLink
Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Nixt, Commissioners Brauer, Levine, Shepherd, Van <br />~'- and Watson. Voting No: None. Absent: Commissioner Johnsonl <br />ocoy, <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt stated this one is hard for him, as he does not like the impa¢'~.?~fi the exi~t'~ng - <br />residents, but thinks it is a good use of the land. ~ ?~!~ '~;.~'~ <br /> <br />Commissioner Van Scoy stated he was out there today, and it is a go~g~? area, b~}~;::will be <br />developed. He indicated if it is going to be developed, he th~s t~is ~?~active waff~6do it, . <br />and less ~ntms~ve than R-1 density. He stated he th~ ~e <br /> <br />Commms~oner Watson asked how long the cul-de-sac ~M be. . <br /> <br />Associate Planner Wald stated it is 649 feet. <br /> <br />could configure apProximatel~ 35 units on this site. <br />units scattered on the wetlands. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt stated he wondered why they could not carve 32 and 33 and access the <br />other lots through that area <br /> <br />City Engineer Linton indicated th~ i~"':'~et[hnds: that would be im'p&fited if you put a road <br />through there. He stated if theY shlft$~;:the r°~'~i'i~i':~the,..~est, the d~hnce of wetl'and to cross <br />would be larger. He indicated thi~ seem~ be a na~ o:f~e wetland. <br />Commissioner Brauer stated he thinks i~ii'~hiS':~'~e there',!?~':5ome rationale for a PUD: He <br />indicated if they allowed it to be developed '~K: 1 there would be asimilar number of houses. <br /> <br />Motion by Chai~erson Nixt,';'~&onded by C~i'°ner Van Scoy to recommend to the City <br />Council approVal of the preliminary plan c0~glent upon compliance with City Staff Review <br />LeUer dated: April l, 2005 anti,pon receiving a rezoning to PUD. <br /> <br />Commissioner Shepher~ Stated she would like to see removal of Lots 1-14, based on transition <br />from wetland to a dense: Street to dense housing in a small area. <br /> <br />Chairperson NiX[ noted his motion is predicated on the statements by the developer that they <br /> He stated, he would rather see this than 35 <br /> <br />Motion failed: 3:3. Voting Yes: Chairperson Nixt, CommissiOners Levine, and Van Scoy. <br />Voting No: Commissioners Brauer,-Shepherd, and Watson. Absent: Commissioner Johnson. <br /> <br />Commissioner Watson stated he just cannot agree for the many reaSons Commissioner Brauer <br />brought up. He indicated the road to the north is not good planning, and just because it is real <br />estate does not mean it has to be developed. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/April 7,' 2005 <br /> Page 20 of 23 <br /> <br />-227- <br /> <br /> <br />