PC 101100 - Laserfiche WebLink

In respoase to a question from Commissioner Roberts regarding the proposed construction haul route, Mr. G-mbstick advised that the "new" Vineyard Avenue would be the appropriate route. Discussion ensued regarding the timeframe for the consWaction of the "new" Vineyard Avenue and the access to adjacent properties during the construction and following the completion of the road. Mr. Swift provided clarification regarding the construction of the proposed elementary school and the timing of the construction of the new mad. He noted that conditions have been included that state by the tentative map stage staff will look at how the phasing for the construction of the new road will take place. Commissioner Roberts advised that she has spoken to a number of people regarding the South Livermore Valley Agricultural Land Trust, including Lois Lutz, the Chairperson of the Land Trust. Commissioner Roberts asked if the timing stated in Condition 31 is the usual time for recording the easement. Mr. Pavan stated that the easement would be recorded at the time of the Final Map. Commissioner Roberts reported that the Land Trust would like the model language used by the Trust to be used for this easement. Discussion ensued regarding the proposed easement and the proposed uses designated for this area. Commissioner Arkin questioned whether the easement would specify that grapes will be grown there, or if it would allow for any agricultural use. He stated that he wants to be sure that the area will reflect what is shown in the photos of the Specific Plan. Mr. Pavan advised that Mr. Brozosky has expressed concern regarding the proposed construction hours. He noted th_at the Planning Commission has the latitude to modify the construction hours. He also advised that Mr. Brozosky has indicated concern regarding the number of trees to be removed. Mr. Pavan noted that the proposed tree removal plan reflects the standards set forth in the Specific Plan and that the tree replacement plan exceeds the requirements of the Specific Plan. Mr. Pavan advised that staffis recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the project subject to the modified conditions in staff's memo. Commissioner Roberts questioned whether any of the Commissioners were invited to walk the property. Commissioner Arkin noted that he was not invited, but he attempted to, but was disappointed that there were no stakes depicting the "new" Vineyard Avenue realignment and the siting of homes. Commissioner Maas advised that she wasn't able to go out to the site, but that this is one of her concerns and that she would feel a lot better if she had the oppommity to visit the site. Commissioner Kameny noted that he was not invited to walk the site. In response to a question from Commissioner Maas, Mr. Pavan advised that the Hahner property is allowed 30 new units, plus one unit for each of the existing units currently on the site, for a total of 32 units. He noted that staff visited the site and surveyed two existing homes, both, which are habitable. Commissioner Roberts stated that in the Vineyard Corridor Specific Plan passed on June 1, 1999, there were a total of 31 units for this property (25 medium density, one existing unit, four low density residential, and one vineyard estate). She questioned how another unit appeared during the last year and one-half. Mr. Pavan responded that at the time the Specific Plan was adopted, staff'was unaware that there was a second habitable unit on the property. He advised that Mr. Gary Smith, the City's Building Official, visited the site, and he PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 11, 2000 Page 3