1 8 25 WO PB Draft Minutes

the fact that this is an established business that wants to remain here. Without expansion, the business may need to leave the community. • Since there are no additional employees, the site doesn’t require additional parking. • In terms of desirable visual impact, the architect showed that you are only going to see a very small portion of the new addition from the street. • In terms of the negative criteria, in the planners’ opinion, there is no substantial detriment to the public good and there is no substantial impediment of the zone planner of the zoning ordinance. • BOARD QUESTIONS Ms. Scarpa asked given that a lot of the area downtown is in a flood zone, would it help mitigate that by planting more trees with a deeper root system in front of the property. Mr. Crespo said that after speaking with the forester, Mr. Kip, he did not want the deeprooted trees there. PROFESSIONALS QUESTIONS PUBLIC QUESTIONS GENERAL DISCUSSION PUBLIC COMMENT Motion: Chairman Bagoff Second: Mayor McCartney Alper: Y Morgan: --- Bagoff: Y Rutherford: Y Cardoza (Alt.2): Y Smeraldo: Y Guarino: Y Wilkes: Y Kapferer: --- Klein: --- Mayor McCartney: Y • PB-24-13 IMMC Health 993 Pleasant Valley Way Block: 172.02 Lot: 6 Zone: B-2 The applicant proposes a second story addition to an existing 1-story commercial building. • • PRESENTATION The attorney for the applicant, Mr. Keith Loughlin, states the 2nd story will include a onebedroom dwelling unit for the applicants’ use only, a business office, and storage space in the rear, while the first-floor medical office will stay as is. The proposed mixed-use development is permitted as a conditional use in the B2 zone district. 6