20 - Laserfiche WebLink

minimum of approximately 10 feet. Staff has reviewed the compatibility and feels that as proposed, the project meets the goals and intent of the DSP and the neighborhood. Commissioner Pace asked and confirmed the 10-15 feet mentioned was between the homes and the property line. He asked for clarification on the heritage trees. Ms. Hagen responded that the large heritage oak trees will remain, but another heritage tree, which is a plum tree closer to Stanley Boulevard, will be removed. She noted the Arborist Report as Exhibit B to the agenda report and stated that none of the other trees qualify as a heritage tree and therefore, would be removed. Chair Allen stated for the audience that Exhibit D of the agenda report relates to comparable projects which was what Ms. Hagen was referencing. Commissioner Brown referenced the heritage trees, as referenced in the Arborist Report in Exhibit B, noting the plum tree as #6 and #17, stating their location can be seen on the report. Commissioner Pace questioned and confirmed that all trees to be planted would be 15 -gallon trees. Commissioner O'Connor inquired about what species of tree would be the 15 -gallon. Ms. Hagen clarified it is a Canyon Oak which is an evergreen tree. It will remain leafy and green all year round. Commissioner O'Connor asked how tall a 15 -gallon tree is versus a 24 -inch box tree. Acting Director of Community Development Brian Dolan clarified that better and higher screening can be achieved immediately with a box tree yet at some point the smaller 15 -gallon would surpass it. The tree can get quite large at up to 60 feet, depending on its location. Commissioner O'Connor said his concern is for the existing property owner as opposed to the long-term growth of the tree. Mr. Dolan noted that the Commission can require the 24 -inch box size tree as a condition. Commissioner O'Connor then asked for the history of the zoning for this property and density with a PUD. Ms. Hagen referenced an aerial photo of the site and said it was originally zoned in the 1980's. At that time, the original development did not move forward, but the zoning remains with the site even though that PUD wasn't constructed. Later in the 1990's, the property owner no longer had the right to consolidate all of the properties so this subject property and the property directly to the east weren't included in the PUD plan. The PUD high density residential remained in place so it includes high density zoning, high density General Plan and Specific Plan but there are no PUD development standards in place. The Reflections neighborhood Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 16 August 28, 2019