Laserfiche WebLink
462 <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer asked Mr. Roush if the plan would have to go to the <br /> Design Review Board and the Planning Commission before Council can <br /> act on it. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush replied that if Council determines that the proposed <br /> plan'is a substantial modification of the plan considered by the <br /> Planning Commission, it would have to go back to the Planning <br /> Commission. Otherwise, the Council can take action on it. <br /> <br /> Mr. Harvey commented that the proposed plan was not completed <br /> till that afternoon and that he had discussed it Mr. Jerry Iserson <br /> of the Planning Department. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes asked Mr. Harvey what the specific differences <br /> between the two plans were. <br /> <br /> Mr. Harvey replied that there were three major differences: <br /> (1) The setback was changed to from 53 feet to 75 feet; (2) The <br /> road into the development was reduced from 28 feet to 20 feet; and <br /> (3) The scenic easement was expanded from 11,700 sq. ft. to <br /> 12,200 sq. ft. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes asked Mr. Roush and Mr. Swift if those changes <br /> would be considered substantial. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush replied that he had talked to Mr. Swift and that <br /> both of them believe that the changes were not substantial enough <br /> to warrant a return to the Planning Commission. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer expressed concern that the neighbors had not seen <br /> the plan and that it would be unfair to make a decision on the <br /> matter without giving the neighbors the opportunity to comment on <br /> the plan. <br /> <br /> Mr. Harvey indicated that he would be willing to postpone <br /> discussion on the project until the neighbors had the chance to <br /> comment on the proposed plan. <br /> <br /> Mr. Butler commented that he did not see any reason to take <br /> the application back to the Planning Commission. He concurred with <br /> Mr. Mercer that the decision should be delayed until all interested <br /> parties had the chance to comment on the plan and suggested that <br /> the item be continued to the next Council meeting. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer stated that the public hearing would be continued <br /> to the September 18th meeting. He inquired if there were anyone in <br /> the audience who would not be able to attend the next meeting and <br /> who wanted to comment on the application. <br /> <br /> 9-4-90 <br /> <br /> - 8 - <br /> <br /> <br />