PC 022708 - Laserfiche WebLink

Reznick shared well without any issues. He believed the same should be done in this case. Mr. Schlies noted that he had not communicated directly with Mr. Brozosky about his concerns about one of his lots having a deep well easement through it. He noted that several years ago, they needed to service the electrical to the well, and the electrical easement and line went through Mr. Brozosky's vineyard; they would have to backhoe through the vineyard to service it. They were able to come to an accommodation by relocating the easement, and he hoped they would be able to have similar cooperation with respect to the easement. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner O'Connor noted that since the home sizes were already approved, he believed that was the easiest way to go, rather than complicating the situation with various FAR ratios. The Commissioners agreed with that statement. Commissioner Fox preferred to keep the original FARs and not increase them to 35 percent as was suggested. She noted that she would only support the major modification if the developer was amenable to the condition of vacating the easement and the water rights upon the connection to City water. Commissioner Narum expressed concern about Lots 6-10 of the existing approved size, particularly that the FAR ranged from 32.7 percent to 38.95 percent. She would rather see a FAR of 35 percent because it was a measure of the mass. Ms. Decker wished to clarify that the FAR according to the design guidelines was closer to 32 percent when the garage square footage was excluded. Commissioner Narum would prefer to see a standard FAR for Lots 6-10 but noted that the existing FARs on Lots 1-5 were acceptable. 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. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 27, 2008 Page 8 of 26