Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />JULY 12, 2007 <br />Page 6 of 13 <br /> <br />McCartney added that only those property requesting a review by the Board of Adjustment or a <br />change in zoning are required to post the property of the meeting information. <br /> <br />Mundeline discussed the 17' - 22' wide landscape buffer with staff for a better understanding of <br />the buffer requirement. <br /> <br />McCartney reminded the Commission the building is 110' from the property line. <br /> <br />Staff and Application Summary and Recommendation: <br />Staff and applicant requested approval of the project with the conditions as presented by staff. <br /> <br />Public Hearing Closed Commission Comments: <br />Deborski stated his support for continuance to allow the applicant and neighbor to meet and do a <br />walking tour of the property. <br /> <br />McA vinew stated he would like to see the two parties get together and to continue to the August <br />9th . <br />meetmg. <br /> <br />Dalton stated he has visited the property. He states the project is one of good quality and sees no <br />reason to continue. He reminded the Commission that during the preliminary the Commission <br />approved it with the proposed landscape. He also stated he does not support the continuance. <br /> <br />Loo stated she agrees with Dalton because she feels the end result would be same even if they <br />waited another month. <br /> <br />Dalton reminded the Commissioners that this hearing is not the end of the hearing process - it <br />will be heard by City Council, thus the applicant and neighbor still have time to get together. <br /> <br />Deborski inquired as to the location of the dumpster and could they be moved closer to the <br />building. He also expressed concern with the potential light pollution. <br /> <br />Hartman stated she would like to see the two individuals get together before the Commission <br />approves. <br /> <br />Pritchard stated he is not willing to continue. The company has historically done quality work. <br />He does recommend the two individuals get together before the City Council meeting. <br /> <br />Bennett requested a clarification to the process and if this was his last chance to object. <br /> <br />Pritchard explained the process and there would be a public hearing before City Council and he <br />would have the opportunity to speak at that meeting. <br /> <br />McAvinew moved and Loo seconded a motion to approve Resolution No. 17, Series 2007 as <br />presented by staff with two conditions and the request to have the applicant and the adjacent <br />property owner met to walk the property before the City Council hearing and to notify City Staff <br />of that meeting. <br /> <br />Roll Call Vote: <br /> <br />Name Vote <br />Jeff Lipton Excused <br />Chris Pritchard Yes <br />Susan S. Loo Yes <br />Gail Hartman Yes <br />Hank Dalton Yes <br />