Laserfiche WebLink
prof ect but after working with the applicant and seeing the changes that had been made, <br />he no longer opposed the project. <br />Mr. Aminian advised that he would be available for further questions. <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br />Commissioner Narum noted that she liked this prof ect and was pleased that the applicant <br />went out of his way to improve it as much as possible and to accommodate the neighbors. <br />She noted that she could not find examples of roof colors on townhouses that appeared to <br />be significantly different from the color board; she believed the roof looked piecemeal <br />and that there was a difference in the shades. She would prefer the roof to be of one <br />shade than as indicated on the sample boards. She disclosed that she talked with the <br />applicant about the color. She understood that they tried to make the units look <br />individual and articulated, but was concerned about the roof colors. She liked the <br />different rooflines. <br />Commissioner O'Connor liked the appearance of the homes and noted that they looked <br />like the San Francisco row houses. <br />Acting Chair Pearce noted that she liked the articulation in the differences between the <br />homes and trusted that the architect would select colors that would not be j arring. <br />Ms. Decker noted that the following modifications should be made to the conditions: <br />1. Condition No. 53: Standard construction hours of Monday through Friday, <br />8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The PZanningDirector shall allow earlier start times <br />and <br />2. Condition No. 71, requiring that the developer install street frontage <br />improvements on the west side of R;,-^~ rr°°~~ Vine Street and Vineyard Avenue. <br />Commissioner O'Connor moved to find that the proposed PUD development plan <br />and related materials, Exhibit A, is consistent with the General Plan and purposes <br />of the PUD ordinance; to make the PUD findings listed in this staff report; and to <br />recommend approval of PUD-71 to the City Council, subject to the development <br />plan as shown in Exhibit A and the conditions of approval listed in Exhibit B, with <br />the modifications that the applicant install a fence on the west side of the property <br />and that the CC&R's include language that the garage shall be used exclusively for <br />parking and not for storage <br />Commissioner Narum seconded the motion. <br />Commissioner Narum suggested an amendment to add a condition for the applicant <br />to install a play structure if it can fit into the open space area and could meet <br />minimum guidelines. <br />The amendment was acceptable to the maker of the motion. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 27, 2008 Page 17 of 26 <br />