Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
- Conservation easements <br /> - Bicycle lanes/paths <br /> - Status of horse owners <br /> - Some tabulations in the survey are misleading <br /> DISCUSSION NOTES: <br /> 1. Increase/Decrease MFA/MDA <br /> -Planning Commission really controls <br /> -Ordinances specify max., to be decreased under what <br /> conditions to reduce impact <br /> key concern: impact visually on surrounding area <br /> 2. Ridgeline/Hilltop <br /> -Means: highly visible <br /> major thoroughfares vs cul-de-sac <br /> 3. Architectural Review - Alternatives <br /> a). Panel of professionals w/ Council or Commission <br /> having final say <br /> tior b). Architect sitting in on Site Development (3-D Models) <br /> (Architect available to applicant prior to meeting) <br /> c). Voting Architectural Professionals on Site Development <br /> (City Council Agenda: how to select? Someone meeting with site <br /> development perspective e.g. Michael Freedman.) <br /> (Staff to bring to Commission on 13th) <br /> 4. Look at fences: <br /> a) e.g. Robleda <br /> b) e.g. chain link w/ Ivy <br /> c) help with developing innovative solutions <br /> 5. Site Development Committee <br /> a). Standing Committee - up to 4 month <br /> b) Assignment of a project to 2 Commissioners <br /> c) Do preliminary reviews <br /> L <br /> 2 <br />