PC 071107 - Laserfiche WebLink

wished to control the bulk of the house in addition to the square footage. He noted that the one-story house on Lot 5 was approximately 4,800 square feet and that they specifically tried to ensure through the guidelines that a loft or potential second-floor space was not added. He noted that several small changes were made: 1. Page 21: The lot numbers were retained from the Berlogar property, and the one-story restriction was on Lot 1 and Lots 4 through 9; it should state that Lots 1 through 5 would not be permitted to have any second-story features or additions; 2. The area of landscaping along the back of the properties that faced into the open space would be a transition zone, with no solid fencing allowed and requiring a certain kind of landscaping required. This area should be 20 feet on these properties because they were not as deep as the properties on the Berlogar site. The verbiage on page 22 reads “25 feet”; the actual site plan correctly states “20 feet.” Mr. Gorney stated that they had spoken to several people interested in buying lots on the Berlogar project and decided that they would do the first meetings with the owners on- site. He noted that all the retaining walls would be put in when the roads were put in as part of the mass grading project. Commissioner Narum inquired about “Exterior Colors” on page 11, which included the language “are preferred” as opposed to “are required.” She expected to find language requiring that the colors blend in with the hillside. Mr. Gorney agreed with her assessment and suggested that an additional sentence be included to reflect that request. He emphasized that they required color boards and that there was considerable verbiage stating that minor changes may result in major impacts on the project. He noted that if the developers did not pay attention to the color board, they would be required to change it and that there would not be any leeway in that instance. He agreed to reconsider the language to make it stronger. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner O’Connor regarding sports courts, Mr. Gorney replied that they originally had a segment in the document allowing sports courts. After speaking with staff, they decided that they would not be allowed unless they were allowable under another City rule. He added that was consistent with the requirements under Phase 1. Ms. Decker added that the City typically did not allow sports courts within this area and noted that it would be appropriate to reiterate the language under Phase 2 as a condition of approval. In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Fox regarding whether the applicant planned to change the grading or the retaining wall layout, Mr. Gorney replied that all the grading and retaining walls were as designed. He added that they would have to go lot by lot and design the homes in order to be able to do that, which was not their charge at this time. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 11, 2007 Page 8 of 27