PC 072215 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Weinstein replied that staff can continue exploring that and that he did discuss that specific issue with Assistant City Manager Brian Dolan, who is managing this proposal. He indicated that the direction staff will wind up going in is retaining the existing staff recommendation, the intention behind which was to split the pain between the various neighborhoods. He noted, however, that there are lots of options to balance and issues that surround the Lund Ranch II project, and all of them have merit: some with more environmental merit than others, while others might be more protective of the existing neighborhoods. He pointed out that the Planning Commission, as an independent body, should feel very free to explore and endorse any recommendation for the project that it deems fit, which might also be completely different than staffs recommendation. Commissioner Ritter stated that the City Council will be doing the same thing, and his opinion is that this should just go straight to the City Council; he will state his opinion then, and the net result would still be the same. He added that he would hate to see City residents going through the whole thing before the Commission, and then do it again for the City Council, when the Council has the ultimate vote anyway. Mr. Weinstein explained that the application needs to go back to the Planning Commission because of the 2 -2 split -vote, and there is no way to avoid having it come back to the Commission. Commissioner Nagler stated that one of the central items discussed at that Commission hearing was if there were to be a road up the hillside to connect into the Sycamore heights area, how might that road be constructed: retaining wall vs. no retaining wall; thousands of cubic square feet removed vs. not thousands of cubic square feet removed; and so forth. He indicated that it may be instructive if the Commission could have a couple of alternative drawings, plans, and conceptual ideas about how a road might connect between Lund Ranch II and Sycamore. He added that it may not persuade anyone's vote but it could be informative if the Commission knew what kind of retaining wall was required to minimize the amount of cubic feet of dirt that would need to be moved. Mr. Weinstein noted that it is a good point to get some images and at least some conceptual plans for that roadway, and showing the extent of retaining walls and grading and so forth might be helpful. He indicated that staff can try to work with the applicant's team on that. He noted, however, that, as can be imagined, the applicants are a little reluctant to do a lot of design work for that road since that is not the option that they are endorsing. Chair Allen noted that at the last meeting, she asked a very specific question regarding whether there be access from Sunset Creek Way to the Lund Ranch site that did not exceed 25 percent, and the answer was no. She indicated that what she really should have asked and intended to ask was if there was any possibility of access anywhere from the Sycamore Sunset Creek general vicinity into Lund Ranch that would not exceed 25 percent. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 22, 2015 Page 13 of 15