My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2003 04 08
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2003 Planning Commission Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2003 04 08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 9:55:14 AM
Creation date
9/5/2014 3:21:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
PCMIN 2003 04 08
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
<br />Approved – September 18, 2003 <br />Reis discussed the voting process by the HOA members. He explained that it was a vote by mail <br />to 101 members. The final vote count was 53 in favor and 17 against and 30 ballots not returned <br />and 1 not permitted to vote as they are in arrears. 75% of the voters voted in favor of the <br />change. <br /> <br />Commission Questions: <br />McDermott asked of those owners affected by the change who voted for and against the proposal. <br />Reis replied that all voting is done with a blind ballot for HOA business. <br /> <br />McDermott asked if there is a square foot limit to the size of the arbor. <br />Reis stated that the size will be limited by the size of the lot that is remaining that has the potential <br />for use as an arbor in the back yards. <br /> <br />Lipton stated that the PUD should specify the amount of lawn to be preserved. <br />Martell stated that as currently proposed the setback will control the amount of lawn to be <br />preserved. <br /> <br />Kalish requested a clarification on the definition for arbor and what will prevent the homeowner <br />from closing in the roof. <br />Reis stated that the HOA will control the closing in of the roof via the PUD notes and through the <br />design guidelines that been developed by the Arbor Committee. <br /> <br />Lipton requested that the wording on note #3 for the PUD be changed and to make this effective <br />for the entire subdivision and not just a specific list of lots. <br /> <br />McAvinew agreed that the specific lots need some clarification. <br /> <br />Robson asked about amending the PUD to allow all lots to be affected by this change. <br /> <br />Martell stated that Staff would have a difficult time supporting that change since that is not what <br />the applicant requested. Staff would request that the applicant address that with the HOA before <br />making the recommendation. <br /> <br />Members of the Public: <br />Wilton Hodges, 743 Pear Court, Louisville supports the amendment as presented by Michael <br />Reis. He would want Michael to take this back to the HOA if the Planning Commission wants to <br />make any changes to the request. <br /> <br />Staff Summary and Recommendation: <br />Staff had no additional comments. <br /> <br />Applicant Summary: <br />Applicant had no additional comments. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />8 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.