City Council Minutes 1992 11 04 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

control our building program on that short of notice. Lathrop= The applicant has done their best to mitigate Council's concerns. I feel we need to take that into consideration. To remand it back to the Planning Commission for what I would consider very minor changes, I don't think, in this case, is necessary. I think it's up to this Council to decide on a case basis whether we're making changes that are substantial enough that the Planning Commission needs to reconsider it, not just ~ change. In this particular case I think the applicant has gone out of their way to make a good project better. I would like us to consider that in our deliberations. Sisk: I am concerned about the fact that we acted on this on September 1, 1992. We did have a work session with the applicant, which we didn't have to do, but did it in a sign of good faith. We had a Hearing scheduled for the applicant two weeks ago and the applicant chose to postpone it until tonight. At least 15 days of the delay .... We were ready to go October 20, 1992, and you chose not to show up. This Council has shown cooperation with Club Homes and I resent any implication that we haven't met them in terms of trying to discuss this matter. Hedding: I could support this, if we're able to institute the change that Chuck has spoken to of reducing building No. 26 down to four units from five. Howard moved that Council approve Resolution No. 66, Series 1992, Town Homes at Coal Creek, final PUD development plan and final subdivision plat as amended by Sisk and Hornbostel. Wood: On the September submittal there were additional building elevations, two pages. I would ask that those 24