5 - Laserfiche WebLink

areas where staff would find the Commission's input most helpful and the third and final question is open-ended. A list of these discussion topics and specific questions regarding the proposal are also attached to this report as Exhibit A for the Planning Commission's consideration and discussion. Discussion Points Site Layout, Design, and Access The site plan has been designed so that all of the buildings are located along the west side of the property closest to the two-story townhome development directly to the west. The proposed setbacks will be generally consistent with that of the adjacent development and DSP policy. The homes will be accessed by a 20-foot private driveway along the east side of the property with a proposed four-foot landscape planter along the east side of the driveway and a four-foot wide sidewalk for pedestrian access to the homes along the west side of the driveway. Staff had initial concerns with the width of both the proposed landscape strip along the east property line and the pedestrian walkway and initially requested that each be increased to five-feet in width. However, staff believes that appropriate tree species can be chosen to be planted within a four-foot wide landscape planter that would allow for sufficient room for the trees to grow in a healthy manner. In addition, staff believes that due to the size of the project and the limited access to only three homes, a four-foot pedestrian sidewalk as proposed would be appropriate and will meet the minimum dimension per the Building Code. In general, staff is supportive of the proposed setbacks and layout. Staff would like the Planning Commission's input on the sidewalk and planter widths as well as the rest of the proposed site layout, design, and access. Discussion Point #1 1. Are the overall site plan, landscaping, parking, and access/circulation acceptable? Building Design, Colors, and Materials The proposed building architecture and design are intended to reflect a Craftsman style which is one of the acceptable architectural styles listed in the DSP and Downtown Design Guidelines. The architecture provides a quality design with simple detailing throughout the development. The applicant has been responsive to staff recommendations to add additional articulation throughout the project and has integrated recommendations into the project design to include usable porches and reduced second story massing. However, the applicant does not wish to locate the front door on the Stanley Boulevard elevation of Lot 1 as requested by staff to help emphasize that the front of the house is facing Stanley Boulevard. Staff is requesting the Planning Commission's feedback on the Stanley Boulevard elevation of the home on Lot 1 and all building, design, colors, and materials. Discussion Point #2 2. Does the Planning Commission support the proposed building positioning, massing and home designs including architecture, colors, and materials? Conclusion Discussion Point#3 3. What other information would assist the Commission in its decision on the proposal? Do you have any other comments on the project? PUD-133, 3987 Stanley Boulevard Planning Commission 10 of 11 ct application is formally presented to the Planning Commission. The first two questions below are topical PUD-133, 3987 Stanley Boulevard Planning Commission 9 of 11