Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Iserson presented a photo board prepazed by staff showing the subject property and the surrounding <br />azea. He commented that the home next to the proposed site is a two-story home. He also stated that the <br />proposed home would be sepazated from the Ventana Hills sub-division by 130 feet of open space <br />owned by the City, which has some recently planted landscaping as well as some older landscaping and <br />eucalyptus trees. <br />The applicant has proposed atwo-story home and has designed the second story to be located furthest <br />away from the Ventana Hills area, and all windows on that level would face the front and back of the <br />home away from the Ventana Hills neighbors. In addition, staff has found that the proposed design <br />meets all setback and height requirements of the PUD development plan. Mr. Iserson gave a detailed <br />description of the proposed azchitecture and materials. <br />Mr. Iserson explained that the main issues of the neighbors relate to privacy and view impacts. They aze <br />concerned that the applicant would have a view into their yards and their views would be impacted by a <br />two-story home. He also stated that staff spoke with the developer, Shapell Homes, and was advised <br />that there was no agreement made restricting the subject site to a single-story home. In addition, there <br />is no condition of approval limiting the applicant to a single-story home. <br />With regard to the privacy issue, one solution identified by staff is to have a solid side-yard fence as <br />opposed to an open wire fence along the entire side property line facing the Ventana Hills development, <br />and this has been made a condition of approval. Staff feels that such a condition would mitigate privacy <br />and view concerns by the neighbors and the applicant as well. Also, since there aze no second-story <br />windows proposed on the part of the home facing the downhill neighbors, staff did not identify any <br />privacy issues with that part of the design. <br />Mr. Iserson further pointed out that when the PUD was finalized and when the applicant purchased the <br />lot, there were no conditions for asingle-story home. However, staff still felt it was necessary to <br />confirm that atwo-story home would not have any negative impact on the surrounding neighbors. <br />Therefore, they have visited the site numerous times and concluded that there would be minimal, if any, <br />negative view impacts from the neighbors below in Ventana Hills. He also pointed out that the existing <br />two-story home next to the subject site has side windows facing the Ventana Hills area, and the proposed <br />home would actually block views from the existing two-story home into the yards of Ventana Hills <br />residents. <br />Mr. Iserson described the landscaping in the open space behind the subject site, noting that most of the <br />recently planted trees will take several yeazs to mature. Therefore, staff has made a condition for the <br />applicant to plant at least two additional 36" boxed trees in the azea, strategically placed to block any <br />potential views from windows on the ground level. Staff has further suggested that the neighbors be <br />involved in selecting the location for the trees. <br />Mr. Iserson stated that although he and staff worked very hazd to resolve the neighbors' concerns, they <br />were unable to reach an agreement. <br />Planning Commission Page 5 February 25, 1998 <br />