Laserfiche WebLink
proposed development area and would have less grading while the alternatives showed that <br /> some of the heritage-size oak trees would need to be removed, more grading would be <br /> needed to create building pads, and that the proposed road would be located much closer to <br /> residential properties to the immediate west. The Commission found that the proposed site <br /> layout, shown below, is sensitive to its hillside surroundings, would have less environmental <br /> impacts than the alternatives, and is better than the alternatives. The Commission supported <br /> the proposed home sites. <br /> ----'----•:";"--'-i/' - ,.'27..:1 'V)ki ,41 ,,,.., .....,.- <br /> .. ;:....0-,..i.:::. 41 tl .4 'N 0 4 - t ---N--: <br /> A 1 ) A <br /> ':- i Proposed Site Layout <br /> In response to Commission's comment at the work session, the applicants explored the <br /> possibility to lower the building pad on Lot 2 and proposed a revised site plan, referred as <br /> Alterative 1, shown on the following page. Alternative 1 would move the building envelope of <br /> Lot 2 away from the westerly property line, thereby lowering the building pad from the <br /> previously proposed elevation of 515 feet to an elevation of 510 feet. The proposed roadway <br /> configuration and hammerhead design would differ slightly from the original layout; however, <br /> they have been reviewed and accepted by the Fire Department. The existing trees located <br /> near and within the development area would not be impacted by this revised layout. <br /> PUD-84 Planning Commission <br /> Page 10 of 23 <br />