PC 031010 - Laserfiche WebLink

added, the wainscoting only extends slightly around the corner and not to the back or sides. He stated that he respectfully disagrees that the houses are custom enough. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Ms. Soo referred to Exhibit B; the original and alternative site plans, and pointed out that three of the five homes, Lots 2, 4, and 10, have side entrance garages. In terms of elevations for Lot 10, she indicated that Ponderosa will add more stone wainscoting for the two sides of the house. She explained that the Architect was unable to add this into the plan due to time constraints but that staff has added this to the conditions of approval. Commissioner O’Connor inquired if this would be done on all sides of the house. Ms. Soo replied that it would be done only on the two sides that are most visible when traveling south to north. Commissioner O’Connor inquired whether the design guidelines required wainscoting for the back side and the other side. Ms. Stern replied that she did not believe it was required on the back side. Commissioner O’Connor stated that he believed deliberation should be done in two steps: first, to determine whether the homes must be custom or not; and if so, then the second is to determine what is custom and/or custom enough.He added that if the Commission does not believe the houses should be custom, then it would not be necessary to proceed with the discussion on the definition of custom. Commissioner Pearce proposed that the Commission could first take the custom argument as a threshold and see whether the Commission feels the houses should be custom. Commissioner O’Connor stated that based on all documentation from the Commission meetings held in 2006, the council meetings, and the material presented, he felt the intent was for the development to be a custom development. He noted that the design guidelines do not specifically talk about the requirement for custom-only homes, and the ordinance is broad. He added that the applicants even modified the setbacks that were standard in the Happy Valley Specific Plan and justified this by stating these would be custom homes that would offset some of the impact. Commissioner O’Connor stated that although the ordinance itself does not state the houses should be custom, it is in enough of the documents for him to believe that the intent was that these would be custom homes. He added that when the lots were sold with that intention, the owners were certainly under the impression they were buying an expensive investment, and, therefore, coming in with anything other than a custom home would be detrimental to them. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 10, 2010 Page 7 of 25