17 ATTACHMENT 08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Bawa explained that this is a new community with no trees or shrubs, so it is hard to visualize the future. He believed that the much of the second unit would not be seen once the trees and shrubs grow. Ms. Decker asked Mr. Bawa if he agreed with the Conditions of Approval. Mr. Bawa stated he agreed with the Conditions of Approval, but requested that the landscape screening be consistent with the architectural committee guidelines in order to have a natural look and be continuous throughout. Ms. Decker explained that the landscaping would be approved by the Planning Director and felt that it could be reviewed as part of the entire landscape plan for the property. Mr. Frank Nguyen stated that this proposal has been a problem to his family. He understood that this community was low density and that an in-law unit was not allowed in this development. He indicated that Delco Development had no homeowner's association when he purchased his home and asked the buyers to form the board and determine the CC&R's after they moved in. He added that many items in the CC&R's need to be discussed and possibly changed. He mentioned he would like to have solid fencing, but open fencing is required by the City. Mr. Brysk, representing Mr. Nguyen, explained that the open fence policy was to preserve the views for all the neighbors. He stated that this proposal extends slightly above the fence, but because it is an open fence it would obstruct the view. He mentioned that this proposal is not consistent with the neighborhood character and that the CC&R's mentions gazebos, but not second units. He indicated that the CC&R's do not allow owners to rent out a portion of their lot. He also stated the outside parking for the second unit is in conflict with the CC&R's that do not allow occupants to park in the driveway approach or street, but must park in the garage. Mr. Nguyen stated the architectural committee is still young and needs more experience to digest the issues. He stated that HOA overruled his concerns most the time. Ms. Decker asked Mr. Nguyen and Mr. Brysk if they had issues with the modification to the PUD in regards to grading or retaining walls. Mr. Brysk indicated that if the second unit would not be built, then he felt Mr. Nguyen would not have a concern. Mr. Nguyen stated that was correct; his only concern was with the second unit. Ms. Decker asked Mr. Nguyen if he felt the second unit was compatible with the design of the existing home. Mr. Nguyen stated the only question he had was with the location of the second unit. Ms. Decker requested Mr. Otto to indicate the required setbacks. Minutes: PUD-99-9-2M/PADR-1762 Page 2 January 22, 2008