PC 030800 - Laserfiche WebLink

Discussion ensued relating to the leaning tree. Commissioner Maas noted she would be in favor of an amdysis being performed of the condition of the tree. Chairperson Roberts noted she would not be in favor of charging for removal of a tree in poor condition especially in this development where they have gone to great lengths to preserve trees. Commissioners Maas and Arkin expressed concurrence with Chairperson Robert's statement. Commissioner Sullivan inquired as to the different descriptions of the tree in the staff report and noted he agreed with Chairperson Roberts statement; however, he noted that the reason for the Urban Foresl~ Fund is to create a disincentive for developers to remove trees. Discussion ensued relating to fencing for Lots 1 through 6. Chairperson Roberts noted that ail properties that abut the Preserve homes should be open fencing. Commissioner Maas concurred and clarified that Lots 1 through 6 will be open fencing. Mr. Plucker noted that fencing will be addressed at the design review level. Commissioner Maas noted she would be in favor of the 22-foot height for houses. Chairperson Roberts concurred and stated it would reduce visibility. Commisaioner Maas noted she was comfortable with the FAR. Chairperson Roberts concurred, due to utilization of single family homes in the project and other measures the applicant has taken to reduce the visibility of homes. Commissioner Maas expressed concern with Lot 7 due to the visibility of the homes. She spoke in favor of removing Lot 7, and having Lot 8 round the comer. She spoke in favor of removing Lot 7 or increasing the planting of additional trees to reduce visibility. Chairperson Roberts noted she would be in favor of increasing landscaping. Commissioner Sullivan noted he had three view concerns. He expressed concern with the view of the project from Interstate 580 north. He noted trees are a good idea; however, it will take 25 years for the trees to grow and eliminate impact on visibility. He commented on the excavation on Lots 1 through 6 and noted these lots will require a lot of excavation and that the road proceeding to Lot 7 will still be visible and be a visual impact. He expressed concern with the view east of Foothill Road and he expressed appreciation to staff and the applicant for ail the work performed, including the exhaustive analysis to analyze the West Foothill Road guidelines and proposed guidelines and the photo simulation. He stated his desire for the story pole to still be intact. He noted that while riding BART, the Preserve houses on Lots 25 through 28 are visible on the top ofhil} and that development of Lots 7, 8, 9, and 10 will be visible. He noted that the existing West Foothill Road Guidelines prohibit having houses built on ridges with no backdrop. Further, he noted that this development will be visible from Stoneridge Mall's parking lot. Commissioner Sullivan noted that it is inappropriate to build homes with these visual impacts. Further, he noted that currently there are too many houses west of Foothill Road and that there should be a General Plan amendment to prohibit additionai homes being developed west of Foothill Road. He noted he would not be voting in support of the application. Chairperson Roberts noted the applicant has done everything they can to reduce visibility of the project and she noted that the Preserve is already there. She further noted that by lowering homes and tucking homes into the trees, these homes will have the least visual impact possible other than with eliminating the homes. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 8, 2000 Page 7