CCMIN081908 - Laserfiche WebLink

Vice Mayor Thorne explained that, at this point, his inclination would be to deny the appeal and support the Planning Commission's decision, but hopefully by taking the extra 30 days a better solution could be found. Motion: It was m/s by Sullivan/McGovern to continue the matter for 30 days and ask that City staff work with applicant and appellant to see if a reasonable agreemenUsolution can be reached. If no agreement can be reached, the item should be brought back in 30 days. Motion passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmember Cook-Kallio, McGovern, Sullivan, Vice Mayor Thorne Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Mayor Hosterman 26. Public Hearing: PUD-05-02M, James Happ/Kenneth and Pamela Chrisman -Consider approving the application for a major modification to an approved PUD development plan to replace the approved production home designs with design guidelines at the property located at 1944 Vineyard Avenue, in the Vineyard Avenue Corridor Specific Plan Area Principal Planner Donna Decker gave a description of the request, location of the proposal, said there was a modification of the PUD initiated by the Berloger's in 2005 due to the Chrisman's not ready to develop, which was agreed to separate the 19 lots from 9 and 10 lots to the Berloger's to the Chrisman's. The Berloger's are working on the property, and the Chrisman's are requesting a PUD modification to replace their production home designs with custom home development. The proposed design guidelines would incorporate and be the same as Silver Oaks Estates that were accepted for the Berloger modification to be custom homes and to replace Centex production homes. The Berloger's submitted a home design with stone and window detailing and old carriage style garage doors which is very charming and meets the guidelines under Silver Oaks Estates which is referred to as Silver Oaks Phase 1. The Chrisman development would be Phase 2. There is a requirement with both of these modifications that there be only one homeowner association just as the original development was connected. Staff is recommending that City Council support the Planning Commission's recommendation; find that the proposed modifications covered by the previously approved final EIR for the Vineyard Avenue Corridor Specific Plan; find that the proposed major modification to PUD development plan is consistent with the General Plan and the purposes of the ordinance; make the findings as listed in Attachment 3 and approve the proposed modification subject to Exhibit B; the draft conditions of approval. In the staff report, there are several options related to an issue regarding the well. That particular condition has been amended per the direction and suggestions to the City Council by the Planning Commission with additional agreements that have been in place most recently that both the Chrisman's and the Brozosky's have signed which would supersede this condition. It has been affected as of now which would also meet condition number 23 which was in question at the time of the Planning Commission and through mediation of all parties, has been negotiated. City Council Minutes 11 August 19, 2008