MINUTES OF THE

 

May 15, 2003

 

Planning & Zoning Commission

 

Members Present:  John Atwood, Chairman, and members John White, Chris Brownawell, Linda Cheezum and Dan Swann.

 

Staff Present:  Tom Hamilton, Town Planner, Matt Davis, Assistant Town Planner, and Stacie Sauca, Planning Secretary.

 

            Mr. Atwood called the meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission to order at 1:00 p.m.  The first item of business was the approval of the April 17th minutes.  Upon motion of Mr. Brownawell seconded by Mr. Swann the Commission voted 5-0 to approve the April minutes.

 

            The first item on the agenda was 119 & 129 Pennsylvania Avenue requesting PRD (Planned Redevelopment Overlay District) project & boundary adjustment for a 3 unit residential project.   The project is a planned redevelopment project located at the corner of Cherry Street and Pennsylvania Avenue on two existing lots which were each previously improved with single family dwellings.  The applicant is proposing to adjust the lot sizes creating a larger lot on the corner which will then be improved with a duplex.  They have recently demolished both structures.  The application also proposes a lot line amendment which will require planning commission approval.  Mr. Bill Stagg, the applicant’s agent, explained that the PR district permits up to 20 units per acre which allows a maximum of 3 units on this .17 acre site.  Mr. Stagg stated that the underlying base zoning district is CG, therefore it can be developed as residential with the Commissions approval of the proposed project.  Parking is proposed to be on street in front of the structures at one space per unit.  Mr. White felt the architecture was not appropriate for this project.  The Commission determined that the applicant should return to the Commission with new architectural drawings. 

 

                  The next item on the agenda was Cooke’s Hope LLC requesting an amendment to Cooke’s Hope PUD adding 86 residential units.  The Planning Commission previously approved a request to amend the Cooke’s Hope PUD adding 2 new neighborhoods for a total of 92 units.  71 of those units were to be Galloway’s type units adjacent to Springfield subdivision.  The Easton Town Council tabled action on the project after hearing objection from the residents of Springfield.  The applicant was told to work with the neighbors and return. The applicant’s agent, Bill Stagg, explained that they are requesting to construct 21 cottages and a 5,200 square foot office building in the Cooke’s Hope Village PUD.  Additionally, they propose 67 single family units replacing the 71 townhouse units previously proposed.  Under this scenario, The Cooke’s Hope Village PUD, Galloway’s PUD and the new “Village II” development would be combined into a single PUD.  Mr. Stagg, the applicant’s agent, explained that the new units will match the existing architecture of Cooke’s Hope.  Upon motion of Mr. Brownawell, seconded by Mr. White the Commission voted 5-0 to forward a favorable recommendation to the Town Council for 86 new units, found the request to be in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and instructed the applicant to submit elevation/architecture renderings of the outbuildings for the Council’s review. 

 

 

 

 

Planning & Zoning Meeting

Page 2

May 15, 2003

 

 

                  The next application was the Dudrow Farm requesting PUD review of 173 acre mixed use PUD-residential, commercial, industrial and institutional.  The property is located on the NW corner of St. Michael’s Road and Easton Parkway.  The applicant explained the changes to the plan since the last review.  The Commission briefly discussed the changes and the traffic circulation issues concluding that all issues have been resolved.    Upon motion of Mr. White, seconded by Mr. Swann the Commission voted 5-0 determining that the request remains in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and forwarded a favorable recommendation to the Town Council in favor of the PUD concept plan.  Lot 3 was not included in the PUD and is subject to future review.  The applicant agreed to seek approval of the Commission for all site plan details after approval of the PUD concept by the Town Council    The Commission included in its recommendation to the Council that the Council instruct the applicant to return to the Planning Commission for review of the preliminary plans.

 

 

There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 2:35 p.m. by motion of Mr. Swann seconded by Mrs. Cheezum.  

 

 

 

                                                                                    Respectfully submitted,

 

 

 

                                                                                    Stacie M. Sauca

                                                                                    Planning Secretary