Laserfiche WebLink
6. PUBLIC HEARING AND OTHER MATTERS <br />a. PUD -115, Guy Houston <br />Application for Planned Unit Development (PUD) Development Plan to retain <br />the existing single - family residence and construct two new single - family <br />residences and related improvements on separate lots located at <br />11249 Dublin Canyon Road. Zoning for the property is PUD -LDR (Planned <br />Unit Development — Low Density Residential) District. <br />Jenny Soo presented the staff report and described the scope, layout, and key elements <br />of the proposal. <br />Guy Houston, applicant, gave a presentation regarding the PUD Development Plan. <br />Nagler: To clarify, you said Lot 1 is a one -story house? <br />Houston: Yes. <br />Nagler: Okay, so has that recently changed or did I just misunderstand it? <br />Balch: There's an older set of plans in the back. So if you're looking at that, the folded <br />pages, that's the.... <br />Houston: The previous project in 2006 proposed two, two -story homes. Our project is <br />slightly different so we have a one -story and then a two -story on the frontage. <br />Nagler: Just a couple of quick questions; as I understand the staff report, staff is <br />suggesting a different FAR calculation than you're proposing? Right? You proposed <br />30% and they're proposing 25 %? Is that correct? <br />Houston: Yes. <br />Nagler: How do you feel about that? <br />Houston: That is completely fine for us. We just went with what was the standard for the <br />R -2, 20,000 and that's 30 %. We didn't pick it. We just thought that the 20,000 was the <br />most appropriate designation and so that's what it came with. It was pointed out that if <br />we had 30 %, you're talking about a 7,500- square -foot home. It wouldn't happen <br />anyway, but I think it's a safeguard; and if you tandem that with making sure you can't <br />go above a certain elevation, it ensures you're not going to be needing or designed to <br />go any further. It does give a little room for a little bit of expansion for the current <br />footprint. Maybe someone might want to do that years from now, but it's completely fine <br />for us. <br />Nagler: Then the final question. The staff recommendation on the changes in the <br />development limit the envelope that could be developed. Are you fine with that change, <br />as well? <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 9, 2016 Page 5 of 25 <br />