01/29/1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

projects were made and make this quite clear to the applicants so they understood why their development area, floor area, etc. was reduced; 3) review Design Guidelines for possible changes, updates, etc.; and 4) direct the Planning Director to prepare a design guideline on skylights. Those present discussed the use of windows; indoor and outdoor lighting and its impact on the neighbors; the current requirement for a mitigation landscape plan to be filed with application; and the standard condition of approval concerning skylights. Dauber suggested the question should be asked: "Does the house stand alone if the proposed landscaping is not completed?' On the subject of visibility it was noted that houses will always be visible from somewhere but also that the houses should fit into the lot and flow with the land. PASSED BY CONSENSUS: Agreed that if a lot was highly visible and impacted the neighbors, the following design review issues were deemed important to address: colors and materials, height, windows, eaves, skylights, architectual features and second story setbacks. If the lot was not highly visible and did not impact the neighbors, these issues would be determined not to be critical. PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To direct staff to review the 1989 Site Development Policy and to bring back an updated and revised copy for Council approval. Staff raised the issue of drainage and recommended that drainage issues be referred to staff in the conditions of approval. There were so many factors and each site was so different that it was not efficient for Planning Commissioners or Councilmembers to attempt to address drainage issues during their discussions. It would be better if they brought up areas of particular concern for staff to look at and for the staff to work with the applicant. It was agreed, however, that the staff reports would include information on how the drainage issues were being addressed so that this information would be available for the public as well as for the applicant. 4. TOPICS FOR FUTURE DISCUSSION A. Ordinance Revisions and Policies - Process B. Training The Planning Director noted that such training included the upcoming Planning Commissioners Institute which a few of the commissioners planned to attend. C. Visual aids and other resources The Planning Director commented that staff was open to suggestions on ways to [ present their reports, such as the use of more graphics. One recommendation was to i/ January 29, 1997 Adjourned City Council Meeting