PC 012302 - Laserfiche WebLink

building pad, it would still be over 85 feet from the Bentley's and over 100 feet away from the /""' side ofMr. Schmidt's house. Mr. Grove noted that aside from the view issues, the current location of the proposed house does not balance the impacts on surrounding homes. Mr. Grove presented a drawing showing the square footage of the adjacent homes, noting that the homes on Grey Eagle Court average about 3,000 square feet, and the homes on the five-acre lots average about 4,000 square feet. Mr. Grove commented on the letter from Mr. Roberts in response to the appeal document, and offered clarification on areas that he feels are misstatements in Mr. Roberts' letter. Mr. Grove advised that he believes the Planning Commission made the correct decision in September 2000 regarding balancing the impact on all of the neighbors and this was not carried-out in its most important aspect. COMMENTS FROM THE APPLICANT - Allen Roberts, 27 Grey Eagle Court, noted that this is the last lot in the Grey Eagle development. He commented on the issues related to building on this site. He provided an exhibit depicting the difference between the previous proposal and the current proposal. He described the differences, noting that the elevation of the ridgeline is 664.5 feet and the highest peak is 667 feet. Mr. Roberts advised that the design was generated over a period of four months, after reviewing 20 different designs, with basically no constraints on the location, and the conclusion was that this was the best balance for all involved. He noted that they have been trying since last May to fine-tune the design to meet with the Groves' objections. He presented the changes that have been made in an attempt to provide for the Groves' views. Mr. Roberts stated that he feels the result is much better from the design presented one and one-half years ago. Mr. Roberts presented an exhibit of the site plan showing the proposed pad elevations and grading and described the four major steps of the proposed house plan. He provided photo simulations prepared by Mr. Dan Parker of the proposed house. He commented that the size of the house is more of the norm of the size of the homes in the development. He also presented a photo from the Groves' window depicting the line of view of the city lights that the Groves' are asking to be preserved. Mr. Roberts demonstrated how the growth of a group of trees which are currently 40 feet tall will eventually grow to 70 to 100 feet and then they will obscure some of the Groves' city view. He commented on the story poles that have been installed showing the ridge of the house and the Groves' requested "cut-offline," noting that the discrepancy is 18 inches, plus the height of the chimney. He suggested the possibility of the installation of a hedge that would obscure the Groves' view of most of the house. He noted that the Grey Eagle community was designed to have the houses clustered. He stated that he thinks the Groves are asking the Commission to overturn the support of the entire Grey Eagle community and 14 months of work of staff and himself to come to a solution that balances the Roberts' needs of building a house that is attractive and fits with the community and meets all the other neighbors' needs as well. He further stated that he sees this as an attempt to remove all of the impacts on the Groves and place the impacts some place else. He noted that if the right of unobstructed views is granted to the Groves, he thinks that the other neighbors will come forward wanting the same right granted to them, and that would probably mean that this lot is unbui1dable. ,-- PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 23, 2002 Page 4