10-17-1988 Planning Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

NIHUTBS OF THE PLMffillliG COMMISSIOH TTimG OCTOnSI 17, 1988 ZOHIEG FILE #1334-REBERS COET1M1 Jarvis added that the 8,000 s.f. would still be within the 11,000 s.f. buildinc pad. By allowing this .25 FAR, it would give each home builder flexibility. Planning Commission member Bellows stated that she would favor something similar to an PAR that would limit the buildability of the lot. Jarvis stated that the Rebers proposal already provides tar more stringent setbacks than normally required. Mr. Jaivis cited other examples of how the FAR would aid in the preservation of the trees and natural vegetation. He stated that on a 64,000 s.f. lot, the buildable area would be reduced to approximately 17,000 s.f., due to the setbacks, and that would allow for sufficient protection of the trees. Planning Commission member Brown asked for clarification regarding the side setbacks and whether the trees would remain undistrubed in those locations. Jarvis stated that those areas would be the no-grading, no-building, nonencroachment areas. Bellows interjected that there would be no disturbance, except for the driveways. Jarvis confirmed that. Chairman Kelley observed that by disallowing any disturbance within the proposed setback areas a homeowner would not be able to lay sod to the street. Mr. Jarvis disagreed with that interpretation and added that if the Planning Commission wished to include that restriction they should specifically address it. Mr. Jarvis thought that restriction to be excessive. Kelley indicated that allowing sod to the street would contradict Mr. Jarvis's statement that there could be no disturbance of trees within 50' of the street. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the proposed covenants address preservation within the woodlands preserve area. The Planning Commission members read the portion of the covenants that Mabusth referred to. Bellows observed that they did not specifically address the size of trees that were to remain or that could be removed. Planning Commission member Johnson asked what the normal setbacks for a one-acre lot would be. Mabusth replied 35' for the front, 10' for the side and 30' for the rear. Bellows stated that she was not concerned with the setbacks a*; much as the true preservation of the woodlands. Mr, Ptlaum clarified that the covenants pertained to the trail syst»,m only and did not attempt address the building lots themselves. Planning Commission member Bellows stated that she was looking for more specific limitations with regard to the building lot. Pflaum reiterated Mr. Jarvis's ideas. Chairman Kelley asked for feedback from each Planning Commission member regarding the size of the building pad/building envelope. Planning Commission member Cohen stated that he interpreted the term "building envelope" to address the house; "building pad" would be a more appropriate term for referring to