PC 101806 - Laserfiche WebLink

,~-~ He then referred the Planning Commission to the Happy Valley Specific Plan Matrix #5. He noted that the Planning Commission should recommend denial of the project to the City Council. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Ms. Decker wished to clarify that this PUD and the density have already been established by the approval of PUD-99-07. During this heazing, the Commission is to consider a change in the design guidelines from production to custom homes and in the design review process. She noted that Mr. Babbitt stated that due to geotechnical issues, there was already a 30-foot setback from top of bank. She advised that Planning setbacks are required and were set from the property line; they did not consider top of bank or the geotechnical building setbacks required. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS RE-OPENED. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Olson regazding whether the CC&R's would be structured to promote the green building approach, Mr. Babbitt replied that the CC&R's were already reviewed, approved, and recorded with the Final Map. He believed the design guidelines were addressed in the CC&R's, but he did not believe that green building was addressed in that text. He advised that each builder must submit the plans to him first before they may be submitted to the Planning Department for design review approval. In response to Commissioner Blank's previous question about fire sprinklers, Mr. Babbitt believed they were a condition of approval in either the Tentative Map or the PUD because the development was outside the five-minute response time radius. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Regazding the concern about the squaze footage of the homes, Commissioner Olson believed that if a lot of green building points were accumulated, it would mitigate the larger square footage of a home in terms of energy consumption and construction materials. Commissioner Blank noted that while he did not believe people would build to the full FAR calculations shown on the maps, the first house before the Commission was 24 percent of the maximum 25 percent FAR allowed. He expressed concern about deviating from the setbacks. Commissioner Pearce would prefer to leave the setbacks at 35 feet and review them on a case-by-case basis. She believed that building to green standazds included not building to the biggest possible square footage. She would like to see some kind of squaze footage limitation more restrictive than the FAR; she proposed that 10,000 square feet might be considered an appropriate limit. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 18, 2006 Page 7 of 22