15 ATTACHMENT 9 - Laserfiche WebLink

and acceptable. Is the revised grading for the new home location appropriate? The proposed grading and retaining wall near the northern side of the house would help screen the lower potion of the house when viewed from the adjacent Reznick and Roberts residences and other off-site areas to the northeast to northwest. Is the proposed tree removal acceptable? Staff notes that the 18 additional trees to be saved are located north or west of and below the proposed home, which would help screen it from views from the adjacent Reznick and Roberts residences and other off-site areas. Building Design/Architecture The previous Planning Commission Staff Report (please see Attachment #8) lists several goals, objectives, and guidelines of the VACSP that the Commission may consider when reviewing the building design/architecture. Discussion Points for Building Design/Architecture The proposed house would be located on existing elevations of 626 to 667 feet (after grading, the proposed house pad elevations are from 627.3 to 630.5 feet) and, therefore, is limited to 25 feet in height and one story. As indicated on page 23 of the Specific Plan, site development standards such as building height may vary for unusual site conditions as long as any new standards are consistent with the intent of the Specific Plan. The height is approximately 27 feet 8 inches at the top of the roof ridge and approximately 32 feet 8 inches at the top of the cupola, excluding the finial. In addition, the house is two stories plus a basement. Staff notes that for the Reznick PUD, the Commission (4-1 vote) supported building heights on existing elevations exceeding 540 feet to exceed 25 feet, but no greater than 27 feet, and may be two-story on a case-by-case basis if the finding can be made that the additional height will not create more of a visual impact to offsite locations and adjacent neighbors than a structure 25 feet or less in height. Does the Commission feel that the height and number of stories is acceptable for the subject home? Is the reduced house size/massing acceptable? Are the example colors and materials acceptable? IV. CONCLUSION With the revisions shown on the current plans, staff feels that the applicants are on the right track to proceed with finalizing the plans for the Commission's and Council's formal review of the PUD. - PUD-32 Work Session Page - 7 - June 28, 2006