02-21-2006 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

Planning St�►ff Recommendation' ' The applicant has revised the floor plans and elevation views of the proposed home. With this the applicant has indicated that the proposed site grading will be reduced from the previotis plan. If the CoLincil is satisfied 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 final variance and conditional use perinit approvals. . As the Planning Commission reconunended deizial of the previous plan, staff would recommend the . Council refer these revisions back to the Planning Commission for their review. Additionally, staff would recommend that in order to allow ample time for Tom Kellogg to review the revisions the application should be refei-�ed to the November 215� Planning Commission meetii�.g. If the Council is coinfortable with the revisions of the house plans and wishes to grant approvals without referring back to the Planning Commission, staff would recoirunend Tom Kellogg be given tiine to review the revisions in the survey, grading and drainage plans prior to the granting of final approvals. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED - . 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 21St ineeting, or direct staff to . draft a resolution for approval 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-day extension request in writing by October� 20�h. .