21 ATTACHMENT 6 AND 7 - Laserfiche WebLink

easement or something like that, it would probably be a PUD Minor Modification. But I think if we're bringing it back to the previously contemplated utility structure, it would likely be a Major Modification that we would take to the Commission. Commissioner Nagler: Okay. And just out of curiosity mostly, the height of some of the homes obviously exceeds the standards, but you're suggesting that's fine. As understand it in the development of this project and deliberations, what was originally proposed by Ponderosa was actually a much taller home, is that right? And that they've already modified it down? Weinstein: I don't think the houses were originally proposed to be taller than this. An important consideration regarding the building height in this case is that we use a couple of different ways of measuring height in the City and we can talk for a half hour or so about the nuances of measuring height, but suffice it to say that in straight zoned districts we use a more permissive method of measuring height; that it actually allows for taller buildings. It does not take into account so much of the roof, whereas in this PUD we are employing a pretty restrictive approach to measuring height where we look at the lowest grade at the bottom of the building and then we measure height to the very peak of the roof. So the effective height here, although in feet it seems it is higher than what's allowed in our straight zone districts, is not resulting in taller buildings than would be allowed under the straight zoning district. Commissioner Allen: I want to just clarify what we're really looking at on height. In the architectural designs for the project, the front elevations, the applicant actually shows it at 30 feet from grade to roofline using your methodology which would meet the standard within our downtown district. But, the table in the report shows 32 feet. So I'm trying to reconcile that. I think the applicant is really only planning to build a 30 -foot tall home. Is that correct? Weinstein: Yes, that's correct. There's a little bit of wiggle room in the PUD development standards to allow for any changes made to the design of the project from these initial plans to the ultimate building plans, so that's where I think you see the additional 2 feet pop up. Commissioner Allen: These plans are for 30 feet is, so hopefully the applicant will support 30 feet because that's what it is. Commissioner O'Connor: And the Rosalyn Estates height? Commissioner Allen: Everything else is 30 feet. O'Connor: Well, the Rosalyn Estates were 32 feet. Chair Ritter: Okay, so the height is comparable. Commissioner O'Connor: I agree with Nancy, but their depiction shows just under 30 feet at 29'10". Ritter: All right, let's hear from the applicant. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 23, 2016 Page 6 of 46