Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner Balch: The first question is about height. I noticed in the staff report that <br />the maximum height is 25 feet, but the height it actually higher than 25 feet, correct? <br />Could you maybe help us understand how that analysis went and where staff is on that? <br />26 feet, 9 inches versus 25 -foot max in the designated development area (DDA). I think <br />it is on page 6 of 9 in the Staff Report. I know in the past when we've had these, there's <br />always been the question of how we measure. It's not a huge number, but I just didn't <br />know if staff had checked. <br />Eric Luchini: The way the height is measured in this particular subdivision is vertically <br />from the finished grade to the peak of the roof and correct, we are measuring this as <br />26 feet, 9 inches. The reason for the height being above the normal max is that there is <br />a slight grade differential and they are also incorporating a two -story element into this <br />project which is permissible provided that they meet certain criteria. <br />Commissioner Balch: Setting it into the roofline? <br />Luchini: Correct. That is where the difference in in the height comes into play and the <br />maximum would typically be a one -story structure in most cases. In a couple of weeks <br />you'll see a one -story structure on Lot 7 coming to you that will be below that height <br />limit. The difference here though is the two -story element they've incorporated into the <br />design. <br />Commissioner Balch: Okay. And then my other comment is that I would like to see as a <br />condition added that recycled water be used during construction of the project. I know <br />we talked about one -off houses so I don't know how staff feels on it, but given the size <br />of the house and location I think it would be appropriate versus smaller lots where we <br />haven't really required it. There was a project, in fact it is just down the street from <br />here; there are three houses with a cantilever. We looked at that and we didn't require <br />recycled water because it was an infill lot whereas with this one it might be prudent to <br />add that condition in. <br />Chair Ritter: Just to clarify that it be required that they use recycled water? <br />Luchini: Correct, for construction purposes only. Is that the condition? <br />Commissioner Balch: Exactly. <br />Weinstein: We should get the applicant up just to make sure they are okay with that <br />condition as well. It has been something we have been considering more seriously for <br />new projects and you're right, we don't have a standard policy for recycled water on <br />construction sites because there are balancing considerations. It's good to use recycled <br />water obviously in the context of a drought, but it's another truck on the site, more <br />traffic, and it sometimes doesn't make sense from an economies of scale perspective <br />for us just to do it on a single lot, but generally speaking, for non - infill projects on bigger <br />lots on the outskirts of town, we are starting to incorporate that condition in and it seems <br />like if the applicant is okay in this case with that condition we can insert it. <br />Luchini: Provided the applicant is okay with that, we do have some standard language. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 11, 2016 Page 3 of 12 <br />