Laserfiche WebLink
4] <br /> <br />that the trees did not look like they were 25-30 feet and that it <br />would take a long time for them to screen the house. He felt the <br />house was too big for the lot and inappropriate for the site. He <br />agreed with the staff recommendation that the applicants should <br />re-do the design. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr commented that the DRB remarked that the siting and <br />landscaping of this house are critical factors which make the <br />typical 5,000 sq. ft. homes built along the ridge no more <br />intrusive than this one. If this were rejected, the kind of house <br />that would come back would be essentially as visible as this one. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver stated that he could not understand why a 5,000 <br />sq. ft. house in lieu of a 10,000 sq. ft. house would not be <br />better hidden in the lot. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes concurred with Mr. Butler that his concern is not <br />so much the size of the house as its visibility from the valley <br />floor and as it relates to the hillside ordinance. He pointed out <br />that 60 feet is not a very large span. He wanted an assurance <br />that the landscaping plan would be implemented as presented and <br />that some kind of maintenance stipulation would be included in the <br />plan. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift stated that Council could direct the DRB to make <br />the maintenance of the landscape a condition of approval of the <br />landscaping plan. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Mr. Brandes, and seconded by Mr. Butler, that <br />Resolution No. 90-10 be adopted, denying the appeal, thereby <br />upholding the decision of the Design Review Board which approved <br />Case Z-89-557, the application of Manoj Dave for design review <br />approval to construct an approximately 10,100 sq. ft. single- <br />family residence located at 9900 Longview Lane (Upper Longview), <br />subject to the conditions approved by the DRB, provided that <br />Condition No. 3 include a landscape maintenance plan to be <br />reviewed by the DRB, and provided further that if for some reason, <br />the landscaping cannot be done to approximate the simulation <br />presented in the photographs, the case must come back to Council <br />for reconsideration of approval. <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers Brandes, Butler and Mohr <br />NOES: Councilmember Tarver and Mayor Mercer <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br /> -7- <br /> 1-16-90 <br /> <br /> <br />