PC 031010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Schroeder replied that they had made contact on several occasions to offer a meeting, and the appellants never responded back. Mr. Briggs requested some type of proof to show that Ponderosa made attempts to contact them. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner O’Connor asked staff what the process might be if the Planning Commission is amenable to taking action on three separate floor plans for now, and the appellants have concerns over detailing. He indicated that he was not sure how to accept the three homes but with additional detailing as opposed to what has already been approved and under appeal. Mr. Dolan replied that the Commission would need to determine which two are withdrawn, and if the Commission wanted additional changes, it could require that changes be made and then come back before the Commission; or provide direction and authority to staff to make improvements. He added that the Commission could also deny the appeal accompanied with adding additional conditions of approval for some façade improvements, if desired. Commissioner Narum indicated her preference that Lot 5 and Lot 10 be withdrawn, particularly because she had the most trouble with Lot 10 with respect to the design guidelines. She added that this would give them three different floor plans and that she supported the exterior of those houses according to the design guidelines. Chair Olson expressed difficulty in deciding which two lots would be withdrawn. He stated that he believes this would be up to the applicant’s discretion and the Planning Division. He indicated that the applicant may not be able to indicate at this time which two lots they want to withdraw and may want to go back and review this before making a decision. Mr. Dolan suggested asking the applicant which lots they would like to withdraw and which ones they want to keep. He indicated that they may be open to the Commission’s preference on the architecture if they were able to make the selection. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS RE-OPENED. Ms. Hardy stated that their preference would be to construct the Craftsman home design on Lot1, the Ranch home design on Lot 2, and the single-story Ranch home on Lot 4. She explained that this would give the plan a mix of one single-story house and two two-story houses, each having different orientations. She added that they hope removing Lot 5would provide them another opportunity to work with Robert Miller. She noted that the appellants had cited concerns over the elevation of the house on Lot 10. In summary, she indicated that they would withdraw the design review applications for Lot 5 and Lot 10. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 10, 2010 Page 13 of 25