CityView Portal
| We are sorry but no more comments are being taken for this case |
| Return to CityView Portal |
| Submitted comments will appear below after staff approval. | |
|---|---|
| Marc June | 1/2/2019 10:16:46 AM |
| The following observations are pertinent to the Board's review of its prior decision on remand re a variance on pedestrian connectivity requirements. 1. Planning Staff's recommendation against granting the variance represents the only occasion Staff has disagreed with the Developer since responsibility was transferred to Mr. McLaughlin approximately 3 years ago. While Staff said little to defend its position at the prior hearing, Staff's recommendation, at least as of this time, has not changed. 2. The Board of Adjustment rejected the Platting Board Findings (Adopted by Consent Agenda and presumably prepared by Planning Staff) purporting to justify the variance. 3. In order to grant the variance, the Board must specifically reject each of Planning Staff's 4 Recommendations found on pages 70-72 of the Staff report. Otherwise, the variance must be DENIED. 4. The neighborhood tried to meet with the Developer to resolve platting/zoning issues with the Developer advising that it did not wish to do so. | |