11 ATTACHMENT 7 - Laserfiche WebLink

Finally, the result of these measures, taken individually and in the aggregate, is that the best engineering and sound fire prevention practices have been employed to ensure an appropriate level of safety and fire protection to the community. • Home Size and FAR Home Size/Visuals During the public hearing, members of the public asked if the visual simulations adequately represented the size of the homes to be built, given the proposed FAR's. The intent of the simulations, however, was to show whether or not a structure would be visible, not to represent precisely the size of the house on the lot. The text of the Draft EIR and Draft EIR Errata provided in the Final EIR that there will be a visual impact, that it can be mitigated by landscaping, and that additional lots should be added to the list of "visible lots" such that these lots would be required to follow the site design landscaping criteria rather than the less onerous criteria for those lots not considered highly visible. The purpose of the visual simulations was to graphically represent a large home on the site and its location within a building envelope. For that purpose, staff does not believe that any difference between a 7500-square foot home and a 10,000-square foot home would be significant. Accordingly, staff believes that the questions related to visibility of the homes have been addressed, including additional conditions of approval requiring a property owner to provide visual simulations at the time a particular house design comes forward. That is the appropriate time to evaluate those visual impacts which will be buttressed by true engineering analysis and fine lot grading necessary to optimize the building set into the site by landscaping, by ensuring that only two stories would be visible at any grade and by assuring acceptable scale and placement of any accessory structures proposed as part of the primary home development. Staff believes the simulations accurately depict what will be seen, and that has translated into understanding that structures will be visible. Staff believes the process proposed requiring a first evaluation by the development's architectural review board, then City review, will be successful as it has been in other recent developments in the City, notably Mariposa Ranch. A similar approach has been taken on a smaller scale for other developments the City has recently reviewed and approved. The Planning Commission did not have concerns related to visual impacts from the Austin development because the simulations effectively showed, as Oak Grove has done, views from adjacent neighbors without landscaping, with five years' growth, and finally with 15 years' growth. The visual analysis of the Austin development was very similar in that it demonstrated clearly that the homes would be seen while showing that over time, the visual effects would be mitigated by the extensive landscaping provided. PUD-33, Oak Grove Planned Unit Development Planning Commission Page 13