My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 1995 02 28
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
1994-1999 Planning Commission
>
1995 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 1995 02 28
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/15/2021 12:32:23 PM
Creation date
7/15/2021 12:14:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
lot size has been raised roughly 1000 square feet with the additional two foot <br />separation between buildings. <br />Q. The minimum lot size in Pine Street is 4000? <br />A. A little over 4000. <br />Q. The envelopes are going to be similar to Pine Street? <br />A. Yes. What we are contemplating in housing models here is three of the Pine Street <br />Park houses plus a group of new designs. The primary difference is that we have <br />added a ranch house in the series and extended the front porch feature. <br />Q. As I enter into the subdivision will I visually see a street scape of a number of two <br />car garages projecting out towards the street, similar to some other developments <br />in the City? <br />A. The answer is basically yes. One of the reason we have developed an <br />architecturally extensive front porch for these houses is to mitigate some of that <br />look. More of the entry comes forward. In a public configuration there is not <br />much of a way to turn garages 90 degrees to the street. <br />Q. How would you feel about having the setback relief of 18 feet for the non -garage <br />portion of the houses and then a minimum setback of 25 feet for the garage front? <br />A. With out sitting down and doing a detailed site plan it is hard to answer that. My <br />guess is that it would not work. What we tried to do with this plan is get <br />something that would work for us and still come as close to existing neighborhoods <br />as we could. The constraint was to correlate public street sections and radius. <br />They so much dictate the lot layout that I think we would be constrained in that it <br />would not allow a variety of the models. <br />Q. Variety from what standpoint, certainly not from street <br />scape because with the garages up front .that is what you <br />see. <br />A. You still get a great deal of variety in the house types. They are all very different <br />massing types. Grant it they do have two car garages. <br />Q. Have you considered any plans of that nature? <br />A. With regard to setbacks? <br />Q. Yes. From the street scape of the garage but allowing the other portion of the <br />house to come up closer to the street? <br />A. No we have not. <br />Q. In response to artificially increasing grade elevation, it that something that will be <br />done? <br />A. If you look at the way the pieces of property have the grade coming across it you <br />can't build on it and not change the grade. The way that you do that, especially <br />with single family, is that you have to cut into the hill and on the opposite side you <br />fill to make building pads. The other thing that controls that is getting a roadway <br />system up into the site. What you end up doing is platforming it in two places, <br />then going the maximum grades to get up there to reduce that as much as you can. <br />That is one of the reasons we stepped into the grade near Via Appia, to minimize <br />the amount of fill area we have to do. <br />12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.