11 ATTACHMENT 7 - Laserfiche WebLink

These developments are examples of benefits development projects bring to the City in the form of substantial amenities of open space, ensuring that the City will be wrapped with natural areas that the residents will enjoy that otherwise would neither be available for the enjoyment of residents nor able to be maintained in perpetuity. Attachment 4 provides additional clarification. Notwithstanding the use of a smaller template, staff believes the simulations provide the tools for the decision-makers to evaluate the visual impacts. Staff believes this is one component among many and that it needs to be evaluated in the context of the entire project. FAR The issue of FAR has been substantially answered; however, staff believes that the Planning Commission may appreciate some clarification. Originally, the project did not propose a FAR limit for the development but rather intended to utilize the development guidelines which provide such site constraint restrictions that the size of a proposed home would be limited just based on topography or other factors. Staff was not confident that at the design level these discussions would be able to successfully be implemented. The applicant evaluated what they believed to be an appropriate-sized home understanding that the lots and homes will be at a premium and anyone investing at this location would wish to have the opportunity to have estate-sized homes. The lots have been substantially increased in size. Therefore, the applicant proposed a 25-percent FAR with a cap of the largest-sized home as 12,500 square feet including accessory structures. The staff report that was circulated in March 2007, had a recommendation from staff to limit the home sizes to 8,000 square feet with 2,000 square feet allowed for accessory structures along with an 800-square-foot garage exemption. The applicant discussed this alternative with staff and was willing initially to agree. The applicant then considered further how this square footage compared with the 25-percent FAR. Staff notified the Planning Commission at that time that this portion of the staff report would likely change significantly and that when the project would come forward, the staff report would provide different recommendations at that time. Staff re-evaluated the question of FAR and believes an equitable solution is for an across-the-board 20 percent FAR. This results in only about ten lots that could have houses proportionately larger that what the applicant had originally proposed. Staff also evaluated the FAR based on the tables generated within the June 13, 2007 staff report. These FAR's clearly show that the majority of the homes will be 10,000 square feet or less. Those homes that may be larger based on a 20-percent FAR would be proportionate to the lot as noted above. Having a consistent FAR is also more customer-friendly in that when an applicant comes to the public counter, the PUD-33, Oak Grove Planned Unit Development Planning Commission Page 14