Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Chairperson Fox would like to discuss the timing of the landscaping and suggested <br />holding a straw vote of the other issues brought forward. <br /> <br />Ms. Decker noted that it was not necessary for the Commission to vote on the issues; any <br />concerns would be researched by staff and brought back to the Commission. She then <br />summarized the concerns brought forth by the Commission: <br /> <br />1. Review the modifications to the conditions with regard to Steve Brozosky’s issues <br />that were discussed; <br />2. Provide a better definition of FAR, and look at either developable area or the <br />kinds of exceptions as defined in the guidelines, such as 600-square-foot <br />exemptions in garages; <br />3. Revisit the EIR mitigations, capture and bring forward the conditions of approval <br />to reiterate what would be required per the EIR, as well as the PUDs and tract <br />maps; <br />4. Address visuals and potential conditions to be considered by the Planning <br />Commission in terms of the overall project and the visual impact of the lower five <br />homes; <br /> <br />5.Define home sizes as reflected in the PUD approval; <br /> <br />6.Merge the tentative map conditions with the current conditions of approval; <br /> <br />7.Research the issues surrounding the well. <br /> <br />Commissioner O’Connor noted that a conflict existed in PUD-05 and that a condition of <br />approval stated that the curtailment of the well would be addressed in the vesting <br />tentative map. <br /> <br />Ms. Decker noted that staff has been aware of the conundrum regarding the well and that <br />the Brozoskys, Chrismans, and Berlogars had been working on it for ten years. Staff was <br />reticent to modify a condition that was developed through the City Council PUD project <br />conditioning; staff could bring back what was approved by City Council through the <br />PUD and tract map process. Staff could also return to address Mr. Brozosky’s request <br />that the rights and the use of the easement be abandoned. The Planning Commission may <br />make a recommendation to the City Council to modify those conditions. <br /> <br />Commissioner O’Connor wanted to ensure that the lighting issue be further addressed as <br />detailed in the design standards. Ms. Decker noted that the development agreement <br />would be provided to the Commission well in advance of the next meeting. <br /> <br />A recess was called at 9:05 p.m. <br /> <br />Chairperson Fox reconvened the meeting at 9:20 p.m. <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 11, 2007 Page 13 of 27 <br /> <br /> <br />