Laserfiche WebLink
She stated that they also have not heard support from the residents in this area for the project. She <br /> felt that compromises could be made and improvements that could be made to 161"that would <br /> actually benefit the area. She stated that without supporting the project, she would like to see the <br /> process move forward to bring forward more detailed plans and specifics. She stated that the <br /> school and residents can speak to determine where compromises can be made. <br /> Commissioner Walker asked what would happen if the rezoning and Comprehensive Plan <br /> amendment were not approved tonight. He stated that he is not comfortable moving these actions <br /> forward, changing what can happen in the area if a resolution cannot be gained for the list of <br /> concerns. He noted that PACT could then back out and the door would be open for other uses that <br /> may not be desired. <br /> Senior Planner Anderson stated that the recommendation from the Commission would move <br /> forward to the Council for consideration. He stated that the actions of the Council could be made <br /> contingent upon formal approval of Site Plan and Final Plat so that those actions only move <br /> forward if the PACT plans are ultimately approved. He noted that if PACT were unable to gain <br /> the necessary approvals, the rezoning and Comprehensive Plan amendment would become null <br /> and void. He noted that the Commission could also include that contingency in its motion. <br /> Commissioner Walker asked what would happen if this is passed and PACT brings something <br /> forward that makes the residents uncomfortable in the next steps, which causes the Commission <br /> to recommend denial of the plans. <br /> Senior Planner Anderson explained that the Commission would need to review the proposal to <br /> determine whether it complies with the City Code and all other regulations. He stated that if those <br /> standards are met, legally the City should not be denying the project. He stated that if there are <br /> elements that are deficient in terms of Code standards, those could be identified in support of a <br /> denial. <br /> Commissioner Walker asked if there were anything in the City Code that would allow for the input <br /> of residents and their comfort level. <br /> Senior Planner Anderson stated that when the next step is reached, there is the potential to work <br /> with the applicant if there are additional protections or modifications that they would like to see in <br /> the proposal, perhaps even above and beyond the minimum standards of the Code. He <br /> acknowledged that the applicant would need to be a willing partner in that as it would be above <br /> what is required. <br /> Commissioner Walker stated that he cannot get to the point of support until he knows that the <br /> residents will be okay with the project. <br /> Commissioner Anderson commented that he does see a path forward, adding the contingency onto <br /> these recommendations that the Preliminary Plat must be approved in order for these approvals to <br /> become valid. He noted that there would be another public hearing at Preliminary Plat and if the <br /> developer does not meet the regulations,that request would be denied. He stated that Preliminary <br /> Plat would be the opportunity to review the proj ect as a whole including traffic,water management, <br /> Planning Commission/February 24,2022 <br /> Page 14 of 26 <br />