PC 021214 - Laserfiche WebLink

7 development is in Subarea 3 and inquired what the Specific Plan says about visual impact and mitigation of visual impact in that Subarea 3. Ms. Harryman replied that Subarea 3 is the Hillside Residential District. She noted that the three quotes she read earlier from page 34 of the Specific Plan, the specific Hillside Residential District design guidelines, refer to minimizing visible prominence in this area. Commissioner Pearce stated that she has lived with the blob wars for a long time and feels like she has internalized this and is very familiar with this concept. She indicated how her thinking goes as follows: Mr. Berlogar is entitled to three homes within the development area. He has chosen to do two homes because three homes appear to be impossible. When the City Council considered this matter in connection with the Sarich property, it indicated that it was comfortable and its direction was that the Specific Plan allowed development outside the specifically designated blob area. Commissioner Pearce stated that she remembers this conversation very well, and given that direction, she liked the original proposal. She noted, however, that hearing the neighbors' concerns with regard to visibility, she appreciated the work done for Alternatives 1 and 2. She added that while she recognized that Alternative 2 has the least amount of visibility, the Commission needs to balance the grading and all the disturbances with the visibility because it is obviously concerned about the actual hill as well as the visibility of the homes. She indicated that she is not willing to take out 12,000 cubic yards of dirt and is barely willing to take out 6,000 cubic yards of dirt. She further indicated that given the concerns about the visibility, she would support Alternative 1. She added that she appreciated what everybody has said about mitigating the visibility of the retaining wall because she has seen successful mitigation of retaining walls as well as less successful ones, in the same manner that she has seen successful mitigation of homes. She stated that this was never a property that was not going to be developed, and she thinks a decent compromise has been reached. She noted that the Specific Plan has been around a long time and she thinks everyone has done the best they can, given the circumstances. Commissioner Allen echoed Commissioner Pearce's statement that Mr. Berlogar absolutely has the right to build on this property and has brought it down to two homes. She stated that as she trades -off how much dirt is moved versus views, views trumps moving dirt. She indicated that in reading the Specific Plan carefully, she believes its intent in every section has to do with protecting ridges and protecting hills, and that trumps everything for her. She added that all of the options presented are equal on protecting trees; the issue, however, is one protects the view of the hill more, and that option is Alternative 2, which builds at 500 feet. Commissioner Allen stated that when Commissioner O'Connor and she visited the property, she was really hoping, as she believes Commissioner O'Connor also was, that Alternative 2 could have been even lower, but she knew engineering staff looked at that and it appeared that what is shown in Alternative 2 is the best and the lowest that can PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 12, 2014 Page 19 of 38