CCMIN041916 - Laserfiche WebLink

residences, needed infrastructure, and extension of the Creekside trail. As part of Phase I, a 45 foot net would be established to catch errant golf balls. The net was designed by a golf ball trajectory consultant. The architecture would be traditional to complement existing projects in the area, including craftsman-style influenced homes. Development standards, including those in surrounding areas, were described. Height of projects in this area were discussed and that a Planned Use Development effective height is calculated differently. It is measured from the lowest grade to the peak of the roof. A maximum of 45% of Floor Area ratio is allowed in this development. This project is very well designed so a maximum of 45% Floor Area ratio would be acceptable for this project; however the Planning Commission reduced the Floor Area ratio for the majority of the units. A visual simulation of the proposed golf ball net was displayed. The actual net will be minimally visible. The Planning Commission's discussion was reviewed and they ultimately imposed further restrictions on the Floor Area ratios initially proposed. They also added a condition between Ponderosa and the residents to the east and requested specific housing types. Staff stated that project is consistent with the existing General Plan, it looks and feels like surrounding developments, a portion of the property would be protected as a community amenity, the golf ball net would be the least visually impactful option, and the Development Agreement of twenty years is acceptable in light of the driving range terms. Mayor Thorne inquired about the driving range and the staff responded that the current financial arrangement for the driving range lease does not work. A new vendor may come in or they will look to reprogram the property to another use. Mayor Thorne requested information regarding the growth management allowance. Staff stated that 225 growth management allocations be allocated each year, based on REHNA. To date, a total of 59 growth management allocations have been issued. If the two projects described tonight are approved, the City will have expended additional growth management allocations. Councilmember Narum inquired whether the HOA is responsible for maintaining the net. Staff confirmed that a multi-party agreement is in place for maintaining the net. It is included in one of the conditions of approval. Councilmember Narum confirmed the Floor Area ratios for the proposed lots as the owners may or may not be able to add to their homes. Staff confirmed that this is covered in the conditions of approval so that homeowners are aware of the potential restrictions. Councilmember Brown confirmed growth management agreement allocations would be issued at approval for all of the houses and they could be used when the future phases are built. Staff noted that typically when projects come through, the growth management allocations are done at time of approval. Councilmember Brown referred to a public speaker at the Planning Commission level who spoke about street lights. Staff stated that the headlights will be blocked primarily by the existing vegetation. There will be more traffic traveling down the road and some headlight spillover; however, when combined with the design and existing habitat, the headlight glare should be mitigated. Councilmember Brown suggested moving a tree near Melinda which would help to block headlights. This can be added to the conditions. There is street parking for this project which would be on both sides of the street on the surrounding streets, excepting Lynn, due to the narrowness of that street. City Council Minutes Page 8 of 10 April 19,2016