Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/22/2004V Minutes of a Regular Meeting Approved 8/12/04 Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION Thursday, July 22, 2004, 7:00 p.m. Bullis School Multi -Purpose Room, 25890 Fremont Road cc: Cassettes (2) #9-04 ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Planning Commission regular meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. Present: Chairman Clow, Commissioners Mordo, Collins, Cottrell & Kerns Staff: Carl Cahill, Planning Director; Angelica Herrera Olivera, Assistant Planner; Lam Smith, Planning Secretary RE -ORGANIZATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Cottrell and seconded by Commissioner Clow nominating Commissioner Kerns as Planning Commission Chairman for a one year term. AYES: Chairman Clow, Commissioners Mordo, Collins, Cottrell & Kerns NOES: None Commissioner Clow expressed his appreciation for the fantastic support from the staff and the help and support from all of his fellow Commissioners. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Kerns and seconded by Commissioner Clow nominating Commissioner Cottrell as Planning Commission Vice -Chair for a one year term. AYES: Chairman Kerns, Commissioners Mordo, Collins, Cottrell & Clow NOES: None The Commission presented a gift to former Planning Commissioner, Janet Vitu, expressing many thanks for her four yea contribution. Chairman Kerns introduced and welcomed the new Planning Commissioner, Ray Collins PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR -none Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 2004 Page 2 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS Approved 8112/04 4.1 LANDS OF ALON, 27673 Lupine Road (247-03-ZP-SD-GD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a 7,578 square foot new residence (maximum vertical height 2T) (continued from the June 29, 2004 Fast Track Hearing) (staff - Angelica Herrera Olivera) Staff introduced the request for a two story residence with a basement and swimming pool which was continued from the June 29ih Fast Track hearing. At that meeting, seven separate property owners voiced concern with the proposed residence. The issues centered on the structure height, visibility, and architectural style. The applicant's residence does not exceed the maximum height, floor, and development area standards or minimum setbacks. However, it does not fully comply with non -numerical standards stipulated in Site Development Ordinance Section 10- 2.702, which grants the Planning Commission discretion to restrict the height of any structure proposed on highly visible lots. The applicant is proposing to render the proposed structure unobtrusive by the use of. specific color selection for the roofing and exterior siding materials that will blend with the natural landscape and through extensive landscape screening. The lot's high elevation in comparison to surrounding properties and the leach field's location between the residence and the street may make it impractical to adequately screen the new residence from neighboring properties with large trees. [ Chairman Kerns asked staff for clarification regarding conditions #2 and #3 ("reviewed and approved" by the adjacent property owners rather than "just reviewed"). OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Stan Field, project architect, provided three packets to the Commission, staff and neighbors for review. He stated that Los Altos Hills is a diverse community and the style of homes that have grown up tend to express that diversity. This particular neighborhood is typical of this overall picture representing an eclectic mix that is somehow tied together through an added emphasis placed on good landscape design together with a rigorous yet valid grading policy of the Town which ensures any structure is well grounded and follows closely the natural topography of the land fall. He further discussed the design philosophy of the structure. The site, although large in gross acreage is constrained by the slope and lot unit factor. A shared driveway and easements cut into the site at an angle, a large drainage swale which is subject to seasonal flooding, oak trees, and septic field define the building siting. He felt the building siting was compatible with the terrain and its slight angle to the contours is compensated by the four foot step in the design. The house is well set back from paths and the street which preserves privacy yet retains individuality and interest. The house is also well framed by both the land around and above it together with the large existing and proposed trees. He noted that they tried unsuccessfully to follow the Town's policy of shared driveways but eventually decided to create a separate driveway on the southern end which successfully allows garage doors not to face the street. He continued by discussing the main architectural features, materials and colors as well as the trellis. The roof areas will be covered with earth tone colored gravel to prevent any glare and will be V free of any unsightly equipment. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 8/12/04 July 22, 2004 Page 3 In discussing the neighbors views, he noted the following: 1) Harrison: they have consulted extensively with them as they are the most affected and through careful discussions, have arrived at a positive tree screening proposal that works to the benefit of all. 2) Hamilton: view is minimally affected and they would like to propose offering the Hamiltons the services of their landscape team to propose the appropriate plantings on their property as this will be the most affective screening solution, possibly requiring a low bush of approximately 4 feet in height and 8 feet wide. 3) Lee: they are situated on the top of the hill above the Alons. They have inspected their property extensively and believe that they will not be affected other than the concerns regarding the glare which will be mitigated through the use of earth tone colored gravel. 4) Haghighi: their views are partially screened by the massive Eucalyptus and Heritage Oak and will benefit from the same screening that satisfied the Harrison. In conclusion, he stated, based on the sectional drawing, trees along the Lupine street property line will adequately soften the overall setting. He did agree with staff that the site is a highly visible lot. Also, he noted that the story poles have been positioned along the extremities of the stone walls. This was done for simplification but does not accurately reflect the much smaller outline created by the three dimensional stepping and terracing in both plan and section. A third of the proposed house is 2'6" above the height of the existing house and two thirds of the proposed house is lower than the existing house. Further discussion ensued regarding the septic field in front of the house where they propose to landscape. Mr. Field stated they have a series of terraces they will propose as part of the landscaping, however, the landscape plan has not been developed. They are confident that there will be sufficient area between the leach field and the house. He discussed the siting of the house and the reasoning for the location (pushed back up the hill as far as possible on site) due to the constraints of the lot. They do need as much leach field as possible in front of the house as it is the only available place. Any proposed screening requires that the house sit back as far as possible. Chairman Kerns felt that if the house was moved forward it would lower the top of the house and may be easier to screen. Mr. Field referred to the grading policy. The present structure elevation is at 359. Mr. Field felt the design was consistent with the recommendations of the Town regarding blending into the site. Chairman Kerns asked if it was correct that they were considering moving the location of the pool. Mr. Field responded YES. At the time the landscape screening plan is submitted, the pool location will be changed. Rick, project landscape representative, felt it was important to screen the views to the property from the street. The Harrison's property is up on the hill. They will have a view of the house from their finished floor or from their porch. The issue for the Harrison's would be to have pleasant landscaping to look at (not necessarily putting redwoods right up against the building) and for him, making the house fit the context of the neighborhood. He felt the trick would be to screen the view from the driveway to the house. He further responded to questions regarding screening the fagade of the house facing south (small area between the leach field and house). [ He felt they could use the same approach used on the adjacent residence (Lands of Patel) Planning Commission Minutes Approved 8/12/04 July 22, 2004 Page 4 L 91 Mr. Alon, applicant, felt there were two issues: screening/planting from the street which the Patel residence represents very clearly; and the issue of how additional screening can be made pleasant for the Harrison. He provided a computer generated photo of the proposed house with screening trees. Commissioner Collins asked why they would block the views of their house with screening. Mr. Field stated this was to demonstrate how screening can be done. With fine tuning, one would create openings so it does not block the views. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Mark Harrison, 13490 Page Mill Road, stated there have been many changes on Lupine Road over the last 45 years. He discussed several meetings with the project architect and Mr. Alon proposing several different options, indicating they are somewhat satisfied with the proposal. However, he feels that the house is too high. He provided a history of the projects on Lupine Road, in particular the Draeger and Chen (now Patel) developments. Mr. Harrison provided photos of the story poles. The Town has made arrangements so that houses fit into the neighborhood. It is only their desire that whatever is built, it keeps the integrity of the neighborhood. He would like to see the structure lowered. He understood that the applicants want to move forward before the grading moratorium but it is his desire to know what is being built there, what it is going to look like, and how it will effect the rest of the neighborhood before construction starts. He would like to know what the final product will be. Farad Haghighi, 27840 Via Feliz, his property looks directly onto the Alon property. He stated that much of the existing vegetation and trees have been removed from this dominate lot with a proposed visible structure. The owners should be concerned with the neighbors and neighborhood. The previous house could not be seen from his site but without the vegetation and trees they will be looking at a massive house. He suggested lowering the house, making it smaller with the addition of much vegetation for screening. They had not been contacted by the new owners regarding the construction prior to a few days ago. Jitze Couperus, 13680 Page Mill Road, stated he does not see this property from his back yard but he has been a part of the Lupine Acres Community for a long time and has seen two new homes go up around him. He suggested lowering the house by nestling it into the hill. Regarding landscaping, many times it is not kept up regardless of the required deposits. Ash Patel, 27765 Lupine Road, discussed the history of his house ( previously owned by the Chens) and the process they had gone through and the changes made to the house design which included lowering the house 7 feet. When he moved in he was not satisfied with the landscaping as the house was very exposed. He has since added screening including several large trees. The height of the Alon house will make landscape screening challenging. Anything that can be done to drop the house will make a big difference. Ia L Planning Commission Minutes Approved 8/12/04 July 22, 2004 Page 5 01W Pat Ley, 26850 Ortega Drive, Environmental Design Committee representative at the Fast Track meeting. At that time she questioned the code which states "the purpose is to create the maximum compatibility of development with the natural environment to insure that structures viewed from off-site blend harmoniously with the natural landscape and are unobtrusive". This house will be visible beyond this range of hills to the next range of hills (will be seen from 15 miles away). She felt this house was impossible to blend in with the landscape. The landscaping should be all around the house, not just at street level. The offer to landscape other people's property is not a sufficient way to landscape. Gary Cross, architect with Anderson Brule Architects, representing Su and Jon Lee at 27715 Lupine Road. They could not be at the meeting but wanted him to bring up their concerns regarding the reflectivity of the materials of the roof, the massing of the proposed structure and the lack of context to the proposed area (environment and surrounding area). The reflectivity and glare of the roofing material is a prime concern especially from the patio and deck area. They are requesting the use of a non reflective material and the ability of reviewing the proposed gravel material to make sure it meets the requirements and will not blow off to one side during windy days. The Lee's also would like the mass and height of the building reduced (reduce 5-8 feet) asking for a building that will fit in and be harmonious with the environment and the surrounding neighborhood. Tim & Lynn Hamilton, 27677 Lupine Road, stated that they can see the story poles from every room in their home which faces the hills. Their concern is that the structure is too high. They will see the structure every time they are on their driveway with their four children. It impacts the entrance to their property. They had signed a letter that was drafted as a group, explaining the principle concerns. He has no idea regarding the reflectivity from their prospective. He asked the Commissioners to not leave it for the neighbors to rely on screening techniques to solve this problem. They have seen the landscape plans and there is only one tree (heritage oak) that will be saved. He is not confident that the existing eucalyptus tree will remain let alone redwood trees be planted. He asked that the building be lowered 10 feet and that he have a clew understanding of the entire project before it starts. John Dukes, 27783 Lupine Road, felt the structure should be mitigated from the road. The house should be lowered 10 feet, the entire landscape plan be reviewed and the location of the pool be determined. There have been so many trees removed since the property was the purchased. If the house is lowered 10 feet, the house would be acceptable. Brigita Silins, 27693 Lupine Road, agreed with previous speakers regarding height and mass. She asked what would happen if the trees on the back and side of the house are removed. Also, she does not know where the pool will be located. Mr. Alon addressed issues regarding size, showing the plans to neighbors, the changes and modifications to plans, and the possibility of a shared driveway. He provided a photo of the house in 1982 when the house was built indicating no vegetation. Regarding lowering the house, it was investigated by his engineers however, pushing the house down will create a bigger problem for the Lee's with more exposure of the roof. He discussed the existing oak trees on the Planning Commission Minutes Approved 8/12/04 July 22, 2004 Page 6 4 property noting they love landscape and dislike what is on the site currently. They are 100% committed to deal with the issue of reflectivity and stated they were interested in building a nice house that would fit the area with the proper landscape design. Chairman Kerns questioned the applicant regarding the removal of vegetation (small trees and shrubs) from the site, the photo taken from the deck area from the Hamilton property and the condition of approval regarding the use of non -reflective glass (#3). Mr. Alon understood the condition and had no problem with it. Regarding lowering the structure he stated there would not be an issue as long as it was reasonable and in the same physical location. He preferred lowering the pad rather than shifting the location of the house. Also there was not an issue with condition #2, reviewing the non -reflective material with neighbors. He indicated lowering the structure 10 feet would be impossible. Tim Toby, civil engineer, Lee & Sung Engineers, stated lowering the house by 10 feet would be an impossibility because you are digging so far down into the ground, you are basically cutting the hillside away. Right now there is a series of two 4 -foot retaining walls right behind each other right at the rear of the house. The more you lower it, the more you have to cut into the hill. The Planning Director indicated that part of the problem is caused by the driveway at the rear of the house. Discussion ensued regarding the placement of the house, the leach field, and the drainage swale ow going through the property. It was agreed that it would be impossible to connect to sewer. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Cottrell stated he had received numerous e-mails, letters and phone calls voicing opposition to this project although there are two letters voicing support from residents who do not live in the neighborhood. The Commission tries to strike a balance between the rights of the owners and neighbors. As a Commission, they are not allowed to comment regarding architecture features. The building is massive and too high. Under code 10-2.702, he feels that the house should be lowered 5 feet. Also, they should require as large of a landscape deposit as possible, held for two years. The landscaping should be conditioned to go around the perimeter of the property and up to the west side as well as the other side. Regarding reflectivity, he felt this would be easy to achieve with earth tone colored gravel. The pool location has to be determined as well as the building lowered into the ground. With those conditions, he would support the project. Commissioner Mordo felt that the structure has not adapted to the visibility of the site. The design is maxed on all levels (development, floor, height, flat roof); placing it on a highly visible site imposes hardship on the neighbors. He feels strongly about the property rights of the owner but also believed in the property rights of the neighbors. He cannot see building a house of this size and mass on this site. We should not give in to the 5 feet just because the engineers say they cannot lower the structure more than 5 feet. Perhaps design the house a little differently. The L Commission has the authority according to the ordinance to limit the height to a one story or Planning Commission Minutes Approved 8/12/04 July 22, 2004 Page 7 `r reduce the height from 27 feet. He suggested limiting the size of the second floor on the east side of the property and limiting the structure to one story on the west side. He would be in favor of lowering the structure but more than 5 feet. He agreed with the comment regarding the landscape deposit as there should be a stronger incentive to complete the landscaping. They should not count on landscaping alone but also do structural things like lowering the height and lowering the base of the house. Also, the pool location should be known before approving this application. Commissioner Clow agreed with the previous Commissioners' comments. This is a massive house on a highly visible lot. It has never been the intention of the Town to maximize floor area, development area and height. If the engineer is correct and the house cannot be lowered, it may be necessary to redesign. He suggested following the ordinances, making the house less obtrusive, 10 feet lower, providing trees and landscaping. He would recommend continuing this project, having the applicant work with staff to meet requirements and meet the spirit of what the neighbors are asking for. The landscape deposit should be large. Commissioner Collins felt it was important that a neighborhood have similar characteristics. In this case, although they cannot comment on the design, she would like to see something that is more consistent with the neighborhood suggesting either lowering the house by 10 feet or making it a single story. On the other issues, she agreed with the other Commissioners. Chairman Kems felt this was a difficult application, trying to reach a balance between the `r applicant and the neighborhood. As mentioned, they are not here to review style. This house meets the ordinances with one exception of the siting and minimizing the profile. He agreed with Commissioner Cottrell that he personally does not have an issue with the architectural design but felt it would be good to lower the structure by 5 feet which is reasonable. A 9 to 10 foot reduction would impact the site too much. In reviewing the site, he noted that many of the homes in the area do not have landscaping and are visible from the Alons and other homes in the area. He would prefer to have the neighbors work through some agreements ahead of time and try to resolve the issues rather than coming before the Planning Commission. He would prefer not sending the application back for a redesign but to keep the design as is and simply lowering it by 5 feet, leaving the house where it is. He agreed with a increased landscape deposit and landscape should address the entire house. Discussion ensued regarding lowering the house 5 or 10 feet versus a redesign, working with staff, the required landscape screening plan with a larger deposit imposed and a better way to enforce completed landscaping. MOTION SECONDED, AMENDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Mordo and seconded by Commissioner Clow to continue the request for a Site Development Permit for a 7,578 square foot new residence (maximum vertical height 27) directing the staff to work with the applicant to come up with a revised design through a combination of lowering the base of the house (an average of 10 feet preferred) and perhaps reducing the size of the second floor and use of berms to mitigate the fagade and reduce the aspects of the house, returning to the Commission ( for review as well as the landscape screening plan, Lands of Alon, 27673 Lupine Road. r� L Planning Commission Minutes Approved 8/12/04 July 22, 2004 Page 8 AYES: Commissioners Cottrell, Clow, Collins & Mordo NOES: Chairman Kerns Brief break at 9:13 p.m. 4.2 LANDS OF JESSEN, 10435 Berkshire Drive (46-03-ZP-SD-CDP, VAR); A request for a Site Development Permit and a Conditional Use Permit for a 1,144 square foot addition and a variance for two required parking spaces (one covered and one uncovered) to encroach 13 feet into the 40 -foot front yard setback. (staff - Angelica Herrera Olivera) Staff introduced this item by reviewing the staff report and variance and Conditional Development findings. The findings describe in detail the alternative locations that were explored, which would have required excessive grading and major remodeling of the existing residence. The proposed location will be less obtrusive to surrounding properties when viewed from the street. The intent of the ordinance will still be served as the privacy of neighbors and the natural beauty of the neighborhood will be maintained with the proposed location in the front setback. Commissioner Mordo questioned whether the Town was requiring more parking spaces on the property and because of our requirement for four parking spaces on the property, the applicant 4, needs a variance for the required parking. He was concerned with the needed grading. Staff responded that the applicant is proposing to enclose an existing carport and therefore triggering a variance procedure for the improved parking space in additional to their fourth puking space within the setback. The Planning Director discussed the Town grading policy in regard to working with an existing house on a sub -standard lot. The strongest finding for the proposed grading is that the lot is sub -standard in terms of its size and lot unit factor. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Noel Cross, project architect, was appreciative of the staff report stating this lot was recently annexed into the Town, smaller than the average acre, and very steep. The applicant is only trying to improve the existing house. He referred to his two letters provided in the staff report. Currently they are below the maximum floor area allowed and 9 feet lower than the allowed height. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Collins agreed with the staff report as what is being requested is in the back, not visible to any neighbors and does not seem to be a burden on anyone else. Commissioners Clow, Mordo and Cottrell voiced support of the project. Chairman Kerns also supported the application. 7 Planning Commission Minutes Approved 8/I2/04 July 22, 2004 Page 9 40 MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Collins and seconded by Commissioner Clow to approve a request for a Site Development Permit and a Conditional Use Permit for a 1,144 square foot addition and a variance for two required parking spaces (one covered and one uncovered) to encroach 13 feet into the 40 -foot front yard setback, Lands of Jessen, 10435 Berkshire Drive, with the recommended conditions of approval. AYES: Chairman Kerns, Commissioners Mordo, Clow, Cottrell & Collins NOES: None This approval is subject to a 23 day appeal period. 5. NEW BUSINESS 5.1 Attendance -City Council Meetings 2004/2005 schedule -informational only 5.2 Discussion regarding Water Conservation in the Town of Los Altos Hills was introduced by staff member Angelica Herrera Olivera, who reviewed the staff report. Staffs recommendation to the Planning Commission is that the Commission review the staff report and direct staff to update the existing Town Landscape Recommendations handout regarding Landscape Water Conservation. OPENED FOR PUBLIC INPUT Ernest Solomon, 27500 Elena Road, current President of the Board of Directors for Purissima Hills Water District. He had read the report and agreed that they are somewhat limited as a District in enforcing water conservation. He explained that as the water use goes up, naturally the rates increase. There is a small percentage of people who use a very Inge percentage of the water. With newer homes, remodels and secondary units the landscape use of water in the summer time goes up, especially for new homes. They would like to find some way for the District to work with the Planning Commission and City Council to have an educational process to help people determine water use and cost. He discussed the draft report regarding a water supply master plan for the Water District which indicates that the water consumption could be twice what it is now. The District is already over 35% of their allotment. Currently there is ample water but there will not always be a surplus of water. Discussion ensued regarding the big users of water which is residential use. Commissioner Cottrell felt a good landscape architect could estimate water use which would be helpful. Enforcement should be a key, however, it has not worked in Hillsborough. It was felt that aggressive education was the answer but the issue of who was going to do it remained unanswered. Mr. Solomon suggested when someone comes in for a new home or remodel, staff ask about landscaping for screening. At that time it would be appropriate to have the plan evaluated for water use. Then there would be some involvement with the District regarding cost. It would have to he decided as to who would be doing the analysis and who would be paying for it. The Planning Director suggested having the Water District review all landscape screening plans within 30 days of receipt, returning it with recommendations. Mr. Solomon stated that the Planning Commission Minutes Approved 8/12/04 July 22, 2004 Page 10 Board would have to discuss this procedure and perhaps a charge would be implemented. Commissioner Collins clarified comments stating that the system would work for the Town if the Water District could handle the process of reviewing the landscape plans. Chairman Kerns preferred the idea of making sure that the Town has the right information and updated as a handout for applicants to review. Educate people through handouts, information on the Web and articles in Town newsletters. Sandy Humphries, Environmental Design Committee, suggested educating the landscape architects since the watering systems are half of the problem. There should be a requirement for 50% water tolerant plants. The use of native plants is important. She will work on a list of landscape architects who are using native and water tolerant plantings. CLOSED PUBLIC INPUT Discussion ensued regarding landscape screening water costs and updating the Landscape Recommendations Guide for applicants use and perhaps printing enough copies to provide to the Water District to mail to their customers. The Environmental Design Committee as well as staff provides the Landscape Recommendations Guide to all new applicants. The Commission will not pursue having the Water District review landscape plans, only if they volunteer the service. ALL COMMISSIONERS IN AGREEMENT: To direct staff to update the "Town of Los Altos Hills Landscape Recommendations Guide" handout regarding water conservation. REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING 6.1 Planning Commission Representative for June 16ih' no report 6.2 Planning Commission Representative for July I", Commissioner Clow, reported on the following: appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of a request for a site development permit condition of approval modification, Lands of Pinewood School and Palo Alto School District; and discussion by residents regarding the purchase of the Campbell & Ligeti site by Pinewood School. 6.3 Planning Commission Representative report for July 15`h, as follows: "Ground Breaking" for New Town Hall; and financing options for new Town Hall project 6.4 Planning Commission Representative for August 5" - cancelled 7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7.1 Approval of June 10, 2004 minutes PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To approve the June 10, 2004 minutes. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 8/12/04 July 22, 2004 Page 11 4r 8. REPORT FROM FAST TRACK MEETING- JUNE 15, 22, 29 & JULY 13, 2004 8.1 LANDS OF SAXENA, 24390 Summerhill Avenue (53-04-ZP-SD-GD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a 1,184 square foot addition (maximum vertical height 23 feet) (staff -Debbie Pedro) Approved with conditions. 8.2 LANDS OF ARUMILLI, 27933 Baker Lane (36-04-ZP-SD-GD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a 5,212 square foot new residence with a 1,560 square foot basement (maximum vertical height 26'8"). (staff -Debbie Pedro) Approved with conditions. 8.3 LANDS OF JAYCO INVESTMENTS LLC, 26535 Altamont Road (21-04-ZP- SD-GD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a 2,707 square foot bunker/basement and a secondary dwelling unit. (staff -Debbie Pedro) Approved with conditions. 8.4 LANDS OF DIETRICH & MOLNAR, APNs 182-28-047 and 182-28-008 (File# 116-04-1,M); A request for a Lot Merger of 12541 Zappettini Court and a parcel on Central Drive. (staff -Angelica Herrera Olivera) Approved with conditions. 9. REPORT FROM SITE DEVELOPMENT MEETING- JUNE 22 & 29, JULY 20, 2004 9.1 LANDS OF DESIGNED ENVIRON, INC., 24666 Nicole Lane (I 18-04-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a landscape screening plan. (staff - Debbie Pedro) Approved with conditions. 9.2 LANDS OF NEMAZIE, 27872 Via Corim (102-04-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a 352 square foot addition (maximum height: 24.75'). (staff -Debbie Pedro) Approved with conditions. 9.3 LANDS OF ASKARI, 13482 La Cresta Drive (I89-03-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a circular driveway and patio. (staff -Debbie Pedro) Continued to July 27, 2004. 10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 10:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted,, Lanr Smith Planning Secretary n