Laserfiche WebLink
■ Building code changes may affect the project's compliance, necessitating <br /> revisions to plans that could delay approval <br /> ■ The applicant's preference for an agreement for judgment aims to mitigate <br /> risks associated with potential opposition and ensure a smoother approval <br /> process <br /> o Debate on the size and number of drainage cutouts in the cement slab <br /> ■ The discussion focused on the appropriate size and number of drainage <br /> cutouts in the cement slab to mitigate flooding <br /> ■ There was a consensus that a minimum of four cutouts, ideally 3' x 3', <br /> would be more effective than the proposed smaller sizes <br /> ■ Concerns were raised about ensuring the cutouts are strategically placed to <br /> allow for optimal drainage, with suggestions to defer placement decisions <br /> to the project's engineer <br /> o Current plan shows two 12" x 18" gravel areas, deemed insufficient <br /> Conditions and Legal Considerations <br /> • Agreed to defer placement of cutouts to the engineer's judgment <br /> • Confirmed reduction to 4 bedrooms from previous discussions <br /> • Reviewed mitigation plans, including doubled tree replacement <br /> o Reviewed mitigation plans included provisions for replacing trees that were <br /> removed <br /> o The replacement ratio was set at 2:1 <br /> o This approach aims to enhance the ecological balance and support local <br /> biodiversity in the area <br /> Decisions <br /> • The Commission decided to pursue an agreement for judgment regarding the project <br /> • It was agreed to increase drainage cutouts from two 12" x 18" areas to four 3' x 3' zones, <br /> deferring placement to the engineer's judgment <br /> • The residential plans were adjusted to reduce the number of bedrooms from the previous <br /> discussions <br /> • Enhanced tree replacement mitigation plans were approved <br /> • The Commission scheduled a review of draft order conditions for the next Executive <br /> Session. The agent will provide a draft to the Commission prior to the next meeting. <br /> • It was decided that future open sessions will be conducted in-person only due to open <br /> meeting law considerations <br /> Motion <br /> • Mr. Cook made a motion to execute the agreement as presented, which Ms. Zollo <br /> seconded. <br /> • Roll Call: Ms. Zollo (Yes), Mr. Cook(Yes), Ms. Godfrey (Yes), Mr. Sahl (Yes), Mr. <br /> Colombo (Yes) <br /> • Motion passed unanimously <br /> 2 <br />