My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
PC Packet 06.25.20
Hugo
>
Community Development
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Agendas/Packets
>
2020 PC Packets
>
PC Packet 06.25.20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/6/2020 4:32:05 PM
Creation date
8/6/2020 4:22:19 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commissions
Meeting Date
6/25/2020
Document Type
Agenda/Packets
Commission Name
Planning
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
May 28, 2020 PC Minutes <br />Page 3 <br />controlled along the street. Juba stated that Victor Path is designed to alleviate some traffic from <br />Frenchman Road and the curves are meant to encourage people to slow down. <br />Chair Kleissler closed the public hearing closed at 8:06 pm. <br />Chair Kleissler brought the discussion back to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Derr asked <br />Kendra to show the roofline. Staff stated that they are fine with the roofline but that they recommend <br />symmetry on both the north and south elevations. Commissioner Tjernlund agrees with staff's <br />recommendation and stated that the aesthetic of Victor Gardens is planned and intentional, which <br />should be upheld. <br />Commissioner Mulvihill does not think symmetry within the roofline is necessary and believes the <br />architecture to be of high quality. Commissioner Arcand stated that he agrees and that feasibility of <br />construction costs should be taken into consideration. Commissioner Lessard also agrees with these <br />statements and thinks the building will look good from Frenchman Road. <br />Chair Kleissler stated that some variation in the roofline is necessary to avoid looking like an industrial <br />building and suggested that there be a break in the massing. <br />Lindahl clarified that the draft resolution states that the roofline will be symmetrical as recommended <br />by staff. The Planning Commission further discussed the site plan and draft resolution. <br />Commissioner Arcand made a motion to approve the PUD amendment and site plan for "Victor Place," <br />subject to the conditions listed in the resolution, with further discussion on condition 5a. Seconded by <br />Commissioner Tjernlund. Arcand revised his motion to approve the PUD amendment and site plan for <br />"Victor Place," subject to the conditions listed in the resolution, with the exception of 5a. <br />Commissioner Tjernlund did not second the motion. The motion died. <br />Commissioner Arcand made a motion to approve the PUD amendment and site plan for "Victor Place," <br />subject to the conditions listed in the resolution, with the exception of condition 5a, seconded by <br />Mulvihill. <br />Aye: Arcand, Derr, Lessard, Mulvihill. <br />Nay: Kleissler, Tjernlund. <br />Chair Kleissler noted that she agrees with the PUD amendment, but would like to see staff's <br />recommendation on the architecture. <br />Motion carried. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.