15 ATTACHMENT 9 - Laserfiche WebLink

ATTACHMENT 5 THE CITY OF ::::: -n i u ~ .:i:: I L~~S~4NTONm MEMORANDUM Date: October 23, 2006 To: Chair Fox and Members of the Planning Commission From: Jerry Iserson, Director of Planning and Community Development ' Subject: PUD-32, Sarich Workshop As the Commission is aware, this project has raised a number of issues which the Planning Commission discussed at the previous workshop held on September 28, 2005. One of these items was the status of the project with respect to the Vineyard Avenue Corridor Specific Plan, specifically, how precise the house locations were meant to be as represented by the "blobs" or dots on the Specific Plan Land Use Map. Staff made the argument, and at least some of the Planning Commissioners agreed, that typically these types of dots shown on specific plans are somewhat general in terms of location, and that specific plans allow for some degree of flexibility as to the precise building or road locations shown on specific plan land use maps. However, staff has since consulted with Wayne Rasmussen, former Principal Planner and project planner for the Specific Plan. Wayne stated his belief that, due to the environmental constraints in the Hillside Residential areas, the house locations were meant to be fairly precise as represented by the "blobs". Furthermore, with the consideration of the Reznick PUD, the Commission and Council approved house locations which varied from the locations represented by the "blobs" on the Specific Plan Land Use map by finding that the new locations would result in an environmentally superior plan. Staff believes that these new considerations should be noted. Staff believes that this project could still be processed as a PUD with no Specific Plan amendment if the Commission were to make the finding that the proposed house location would result in an environmentally superior plan than that shown on the Specific Plan. There may be valid reasons for doing so, since locating the home elsewhere on the site may result in other environmental issues. Alternatively, the Commission could decide that a Specific Plan amendment is not necessary based on the point that the "blob" locations are meant to be general and applied with flexibility, and that consideration of the proposed house at this location would be based on project design issues, such as building height, grading, visibility, house size, tree removal, screening, etc.