26 ATTACHMENTS (B) - Laserfiche WebLink

Acting Chair Pearce agreed with Commissioners Olson and O'Connor that if the applicant wished to retain the Centex home sizes, she would be amenable to that. The language would be altered to reflect the approved Centex sizes. Commissioner Fox agreed with that assessment. Commissioner Narum noted that the grading was acceptable to her, including the language of having no sports courts. She supported the landscaping for Lots 1-5. She had some trouble with the retaining wall and had some concerns about where the water would come from; she was inclined to leave it as is. Commissioner O'Connor believed the existing visual analysis for the project would be sufficient if the same square footages were retained. Commissioner Olson echoed Commissioner Narum's comments. Commissioner Fox preferred that if the developer wished to return with a custom home development, the grading should be changed to reduce the grading involved, and the houses that would be developed should be more in line with the topography of the existing hillside. She believed that with custom development, the grading could be cut in half, save the developers and the homebuyers money, and save the repair on the streets. The revised grading plan would be more in line with the existing hillsides. Acting Chair Pearce agreed that the landscaping should be in the common area before the first lot was sold. Based on the Centex visuals, she was comfortable with the visuals on this site and noted that the Commission would see each house in its entirety when it is brought before the Commission. She noted that if Mr. Jost was comfortable that the roads could be repaired, she was comfortable with that as well. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Fox regarding whether it would be possible to have the developer go between the tentative and the final map to change the grading, Ms. Decker replied that it would not be possible. She noted that the conceptual grading plan would come before the Planning Commission as well and noted that it was approved as part of the PUD and adopted as part of the tentative tract map. Modifying the grading plan would require the applicant to file a PUD modification. Commissioner O'Connor believed the staff report clause requiring that any damage to existing streets would be repaired should be repeated in Exhibit B for clarification. With respect to the well, Commissioner O'Connor noted that different documents took different directions. He noted that the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) stated that the vineyards in the Vineyard District would be irrigated by well water, and all other irrigation would be by City water. He believed there was justification to vacate the well rights and easements on the Brosozky property. He noted that the Chrismans would also have the option of placing another well on the property if they so chose; that would EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 27, 2008 Page 7 of 13