14 ATTACHMENTS - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Olson inquired if the applicant would plant shrubs so that the lower area under the trees fills in. Mr. Jeffrey replied that the vegetation was taken out prior to knowing that the CC&R's even existed. He stated that he had a chipper come out and they were removed even before he learned about the rules. He indicated that he wished he could go back, but he could not, so he worked with Planning staff. He noted that he originally proposed 15-gallon trees, but when he went to the nurseries, he got the largest trees he could find, which were a 24-inch box trees. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Fox stated that in the private sector, there are certain contracts for certain products wherein a Chief Executive Officer (CEO) or a Board of Directors say they want to review the contract before it's signed or before the product is sold to a certain customer. She noted that the Planning Commission also has things like this, such as for a particular housing development, it would like to have these particular houses on these particular lots to come back to the Commission to be reviewed rather than through staff-level approval. She indicated that she finds it odd that, if there is a condition for a re-grading application to be heard by the City Council, the Planning Director has an application go through the Zoning Administrator process rather than through the process found in the original City Council's wishes. She compared the City Council to the CEO and stated that if the Council wanted to review something, such as the grading of certain lots, regardless if it was decided by a City Council of 20 years ago, that's what needs to be done. Mr. Roush stated that he cannot speak entirely for why Mr. Iserson did what he did and that his assumption would be that Mr. Iserson looked at the intent of the condition, which seems to be an issue of the privacy concerns of those downhill residents. He added that he thinks, as Mr. Dolan had earlier indicated, that in an effort to try and resolve the issue at the lowest possible level without having to take it to the City Council or the Planning Commission, Mr. Iserson made a judgment call that he would try to work with Mr. Jeffrey and the Johnstons and other affected neighbors at a staff level or Zoning Administrator level to try and resolve the issue without elevating it further than that. He indicated that regardless of whether it was a good or bad idea, it was a judgment call on Mr. Iserson's part, and there seemed to be acceptance at least at some point from all affected neighbors that this would be an appropriate way to proceed; unfortunately it did not turn out the way Mr. Iserson hoped it would. He stated that without speaking for Mr. Iserson or justifying what he did, Mr. Roush felt it was well intentioned but did not work out in this particular case. Commissioner Fox inquired if the City Council was informed through a memo or some other way that a lot was being re-graded in error and there was a former City Council action to have these reviewed by the City Council. Mr. Roush replied that he did not believe this has happened. EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 10, 2008 Page 16 of 25