PC 102809 - Laserfiche WebLink

access to a well and the visual from the golf course becoming much improved. She added that she would want to see a pretty sizable conservation easement along the north side of the property with the stream, which would mean that no building would be allowed within the easement. She agreed with Commissioner O’Connor regarding the road and visuals for five lots, adding that she would like the road and the turn-around to be tweaked, which would necessitate moving the lot lines on the west end to make the road less visible and farther toward the hill. Commissioner Olson stated that he was leaning toward the five-lot solution at the prior work sessions; however, the photomontages did not get him to that point. He added that he was impressed with the emails the Commission had received regarding the traffic situation. He indicated that he favored a three-lot solution and that he would support staff’s recommendation not to revise the Happy Valley Specific Plan. Commissioner Blank stated that he wished this had come back as a workshop which he believed was what the Commission requested.Like Commissioner Olson, he indicated that he was leaning toward the five-lot plan, which is consistent with the Minutes; however, the visuals show that the five-lot plan will have a significant impact. He added that he was not sure if some landscaping could be added to mitigate some of the visual impact and hide or mask the lot so the house is not visible from the bridge. He stated that it was unfortunate that there is no benefit from this because this is not a workshop where such input can be provided. He indicated that he can support the three-lot plan. Commissioner Blank stated that he was not sure whether a compromise could be reached with four lots. He added that maybe with enough tweaks, he could support five lots but that he is hesitant based upon the visuals he sees, this would be quite a stretch. He noted that the five lots would still be within the one-lot-per-acre standard, which he realizes is not what the Plan calls for but is still a very low density. Commissioner Pentin stated that this is his first opportunity to comment on the project. He noted that the three-lot plan is attractive because this is what was planned for in the Specific Plan. He indicated that he does not have a problem with the five lots, but does have a problem with the six lots. He added that the visuals do not bother him as much because he believes that there would be more landscaping between the houses as the owners will also want some coverage from this particular golf hole. Chair Pearce stated that she appreciates the visuals and thinks they are helpful. She added that the visuals reinforce her support for the three-lot plan which continues to emphasize the rural nature of the area as delineated in the Specific Plan. She indicated that she tends to treat requests to amend Specific and General Plans in the same manner as requests for variances, voting for them if there are extenuating circumstances, hardships, or things of that nature. She noted that she does not see any unusual formation on this property or any extenuating circumstances that would compel her to support an amendment of the Specific Plan. She indicated that she truly thinks the three-lot solution is in keeping with the area. She noted that she was aware there was concern about what this property would look like from the golf course, but as she PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, October 28, 2009 Page 6 of 13