10-10-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

*■ <♦'0 Planaiag StofT Rcconncndation The applicant has revised the floor plans and elevation views of the proposed home. With this the ^)plicant has indicated that the proposed site grading will be reduced from the previous plan. If the Council is satisfled with the revised plans the applicant should be directed to provide a revised survey reflecting the plans along with a revised grading and drainage plan. This plan should be reviewed by the City engineer prior to flnal variance and conditional use permit approvals. As the Planning Commission recommended denial of the previous plan, staff would recommend the Council refer these revisions back to the Planning Commission for their review. Additionally, staff would reconunend that in order to allow ample time for Tom Kellogg to review the revisions the application should be referred to the Novemb^ 21** Planning Commission meeting. If the Council is comfortable with the revisions of the house plans and wishes to grant approvals without referring back to the Planning Commission, staff would recommend Tom Kellogg be given time to review the revisions in the survey, grading and drainage plans prior to the granting of final approvals. COUNaL ACTION REQUESTED J|V Approve or deny the applicant’s revised application. Direct staff as to whether or not this application should be reviewed by the Planning Commission at their November 2l" meeting, or direct staff to draft a resolution for ^iproval at the October 24'*' Council meeting - pending City engineer review and approval. Additionally, should the Council refer this application back to the Planning Commission at their November meeting the applicant should submit a 60^y extension request in writing by October 20*. a &' j ^ ] i