22 ATTACHMENT 05 - Laserfiche WebLink

the hills in order to preserve significant natural features such as ridgelines, hilltops, oak woodland, creeks, and steep slopes." She inquired how "hilltops" can be reconciled with building a home whose roofline is above the top of the only hill that can be seen from the houses of a lot of people on Vineyard Avenue. Ms. Stern replied that the highest point is about 536 feet; the original proposal was 515 feet, which is approximately 21 feet below the highest point; and what is now being proposed is another five feet farther down, which puts the building pad for Lot 2 over almost 30 feet below that highest point. She indicated that there would be potentially some angles where the house could cut into the sky above the hilltop, but is will be just a small part of that home as opposed to a large visual prominence on the hilltop. Commissioner Allen requested verification of her understanding that staffs recommendation, Alternative No. 1, is that a 30-foot high home is actually five feet above the ridge top; and Alternative No. 2, which staff is not recommending at this stage, would be right at the hilltop. Ms. Stern replied that was correct. Commissioner O'Connor added that this is if there is a limit to a 35- or 36-foot tall structure. Commissioner Allen noted that this is for Lot 2. Ms. Stern replied that it is a 30-foot height limit for Lot 2; and the other house is the split lot. Commissioner O'Connor noted that Alternative No. 2 would actually be below it; but again, it is the visual from below looking up, as opposed to looking directly on. He added that if it matches the hilltop or stays five feet below, and the view from down below will skirt past that and into the blue sky. Commissioner Allen agreed. Commissioner O'Connor stated that the Specific Plan also stated and was quoted by Mr. Flashman that "Residential development in Subarea 3 is to be sited to preserve significant natural features such as major ridgelines and hilltop areas." He noted that both of those plans really hit on that. Ms. Harryman said yes; but that quote is only part of a sentence; there is more to that sentence. Chair Olson asked staff if its recommendation leaves the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Vineyard Avenue Corridor Specific Plan intact and that there is no CEQA violation here. EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 12, 2014 Page 5 of 18