17 ATTACHMENT 08 - Laserfiche WebLink

PUD Modification The applicants have requested approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) modification to allow grading and the installation of retaining walls along the rear and northwestern side yard slope banks of this property and to allow the relocation of two developer-installed trees along the rear yard slope bank. The applicants propose to expand the existing flat pad area behind the house into portions of the rear and northwestern side slope banks. The applicants would cut up to 12 feet (horizontally) into the slope banks and install Allan block retaining walls measuring two- to four-feet tall. The existing slope banks above the retaining walls would not be modified. The City had required the developer of Vineyard Hill to install trees along some of the slope banks in order to help "soften" the transition from the flat pads to the slope banks and help them look more natural. The applicants' lot had seven, 15-gallon size Arbutus `Marina' trees installed by the developer. The applicants proposed grading and second unit structure would require the relocation of two of these trees. IV. NEIGHBORS' CONCERNS As noted above, two neighbors have expressed concerns regarding the proposed second unit and have appealed the Zoning Administrator's approval of the second unit. Frank Nguyen (815 Clara Lane) lives behind and above the applicants' property on a "flag-shaped" lot. The pad elevation of Mr. Nguyen's house and yard area is approximately eleven feet higher than the pad elevation of the applicants' house and yard area. In his letter of appeal, Mr. Nguyen indicates that he opposes the proposed second unit because it will block his views, is not in good faith of the neighborhood/community, is not in good spirit of the community, and is not in compliance with the CC&R's in terms of parking and landscape codes. Xin Chen (2618 Ingrid Court) lives on the northeast side of the applicants' property. The pad elevation of Mr. Chen's house and yard area is approximately nine feet lower than the pad elevation of the applicants' house and yard area. In his letter of appeal, Mr. Chen indicates that the structure would make his backyard activity uncomfortable; the structure will most likely reduce his property value; the second unit is contrary to the overall layout in the community (open fenced, low density); the structure would destroy the balance of the original plan for the community; and the second unit would produce unwanted traffic and parking impacts. Mr. Chen also indicates that the major concerns were not resolved at the Zoning Administrator hearing. Mr. Chen had indicated the following concerns during the Zoning Administrator review process: the structure would block views from some of his windows; the structure is located too close to his property; and the structure would make his family backyard activity PAP-117 Planning Commission Page 6 of 19