Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission Minutes — July 13, 2006 <br />Page 7 <br />preservation; it does not preserve rural character. She was concerned about the maintenance of the open <br />space and the conservation of the open space. The lots on 125th are too close to the road. The <br />architectural themes need to be stronger. She was also concerned with the existing large lots on the north <br />portion of the site. <br />McRoberts stated that he does not think they meet the density bonuses. He also stated that the densities <br />do not meet the intent of the ordinance. The architectural theme is not there and they are not preserving <br />enough open space. <br />Schumann stated that there are some subjective and objective portions of the ordinance and that we <br />should deal with the objective. <br />Hoffbeck talked about how they do not meet the density bonus percentages. <br />The CDD stated that this is what we expected to see, but the criteria needs to be reviewed for the <br />ordinance and the development must meet the intent. <br />Hoffbeck stated that Staff has not taken citizens opinion and what the staff expected to see is different <br />from what the residents expected to see. <br />Schumann stated that we do have an ordinance in the book with a development proposal that needs to be <br />addressed. A separate meeting will be scheduled to discuss changes to the ordinance. <br />McRoberts stated that if there were fewer lots and they reconfigured them to have more open space he <br />would have a hard time not approving it, but he will not approve 42. <br />Weidt talked about the density bonuses. He thinks that they should get ten percent for the endowment, <br />ten percent for the access to parks and public areas, and ten percent for the landscape theme. No bonuses <br />for the architectural theme because they need to strengthen the language. <br />Bailly agreed. <br />McRoberts stated that they should lose the six lots and put parking in for the park. <br />Schumann stated if they strengthen the language in the architectural theme they would get three lots <br />back. <br />Kleisser wanted to see more creativity in the development. <br />Weidt made a motion, Bailly seconded to approve the development with 39 lots and include parking for <br />parks. <br />Ayes: Bailly, Schumann, Weidt <br />Nay: Hoffbeck, Kleissler, McRoberts <br />Motion failed. <br />Kleissler made a motion, Hoffbeck seconded to deny the development as is. <br />