PC 091102 - Laserfiche WebLink

- the amount of trees removed on the site. The trees to be removed must be replaced by trees of equal size, or a combination that would equal the size of the trees. Mr. Iserson noted that the visual analysis of the new house was peer reviewed, and a 7,000 square feet home, 25 to 30 feet in height, was assumed. Staff selected four separate sites that would have the best visual impact, and that the visibility of the house would be minimized by distance, topography, existing and proposed vegetation, and the color of the home. He acknowledged that was a visually sensitive area, but the home would be less visible than the current house from distant views. Staffwas comfortable with the project, and believed it would resolve the previous issues in a marmer that was reasonable for everyone involved. Staff believed that the project fit with the current and future water service plans for the area. He believed this was a unique situation, and did not believe it set a precedent that the Specific Plan may be modified at will. Staff recommended approval of this project, which would ultimately be heard before City Council for their final approval. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Roberts, Mr. Iserson replied that the PUD was anticipated to go for three years so there would be sufficient time for the water tank decisions and the sale. The applicants may go forward as soon as this be settled. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Roberts, Mr. Iserson replied that the design of the house may come before the Plarming Commission. r- In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Sullivan, Mr. Iserson replied that on page 9, the Building Envelope Modifications should refer to 28 Grey Eagle Court, not 29 Grey Eagle Court. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Sullivan, Mr. Iserson clarified the steep grading with respect to the building envelope on 24 Grey Eagle Court. He noted that it would not be within the building envelope. In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Maas, Mr. Iserson replied that the Berlager property was acquired by Mr. Roberts two-and-a-halfyears ago. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Allen Roberts and Robert Grove spoke together. Mr. Roberts noted that the current project was the result of multiple applications, and added that this proposal was strongly supported by both parties. He added that it had been reviewed, voted on and approved by the neighborhood. He noted that the Schmidts and the Bentleys were happy with the proposal. They appreciated staffs patience and support through this matter, and asked the Commission's support ofthis project. -- PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 11,2002 Page 17