pages_fts: 18674
This data as json
rowid | text |
---|---|
18674 | Board Member Burton asked what ability they have within the development plan to limit unit size. Staff Member Thomas said they can limit size via the development plan. He said staff is more concerned with the look of the design than exactly how many square feet. Board Member Burton suggested that they could ask for the designs to be much more sculpted when they come back. He amended his motion to ask that the designs come to the board for review, rather than being approved at the staff level. Board Member Curtis seconded the motion. Board Member Mitchell asked if it was possible to have all the designs be presented and approved simultaneously, while allowing the builder to proceed with only 1-2 units at a time if desired. Staff Member Thomas said they outlined the lots, home orientation, parking locations, and circulation in the development plan. He said they liked the idea of potentially getting some variety by doing the designs a couple at a time. Board Member Curtis said he was not looking for detailed construction drawings, but rather renderings of streetscapes to put the project into scale for the neighborhood. Board Member Zuppan said she was concerned about how the private drive and perimeter fence would be maintained. Staff Member Thomas said he would need to review the original conditions of approval on the final map from seven years ago. Staff Member Sablan asked if the motion intended for the universal design elements to be installed as originally approved and not just demonstrate how they could be included if the homeowner desired. Board Member Burton responded in the affirmative. Board Member Knox White asked that when the plan for the fence came back it include details of how it would be maintained. He asked that staff bring back information on the size of buildings in the neighborhood when the board considers the design of the units. Board Member Curtis said he was reluctant to vote for something that would require the drawings to be redone because of the cost. Approved Minutes Page 6 of 8 June 26, 2017 Planning Board Meeting |