PC 08/25/99 - Laserfiche WebLink

they can do right now. He stated that he would not built the path entirely on his own property because it still would impact Mr. Bach's horses. Mr. Bozorgzad stated if his project is conditioned requiring that the path be built entirely on his property, he will pull his application and he will walt until Mr. Bach decides what he wants to do with his property. He stated that he believes they have worked the best compromise possible. Chairperson Kumaran asked if the conditions are acceptable to Mr. Bozorgzad, with the exception of the conditions that he has pointed out in his letter. Mr. Bozorgzad indicated that they are acceptable. He also noted that the 37-foot height was a proposal, but one of staffs recommendations is that there be a 30-foot maximum, and he has agreed to that. He noted that he does not plan to build a 7,000-square-foot home; he plans to build as small ora home, or as big of a home in which his family will be comfortable. He noted that he is very concerned about privacy, and he always respects of other people's privacy. He commented that he has spent a great deal of time with his architect in trying to address concerns. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Mr. Swift noted that staff supports the pedestrian connection as proposed in the Specific Plan. He stated that staff recommended to the Bozorgzads that they show how the path will be completed with their project, in that the Commission needs to make a finding of conformity of this PUD with the Specific Plan. He reported that all the factual matter that Mr. Bozorgzad went through is true and that lots of options for the path connection were looked at. He noted that the Specific Plan allows the Commission the flexibility to decide what path connection conforms to the intent of the Specific Plan. He advised that the only thing the "dots" in the plan means to him is that there is a pedestrian connection from San Carlos Way down to the east-west collector in some configuration. He stated that while staff supports the pedestrian connection, staff only supports it if it is done in a way that doesn't cause any undue safety problems or other inferences that would make that pathway not a good connection. He also noted that with development of the Bach property, the configuration of the path could possibly be changed, resulting in an access along sidewalks in front of the homes on the new lots, and resulting in a safer pedestrian route. Commissioner Maas asked if it is possible that when Mr. Bach's PUD application comes to the Planning Commission, if the Planning Commission at that time could still amend the Specific Plan and remove the path. Mr. Swift advised that an amendment could be initiated at any time. Commissioner Maas stated that she agrees with staffs recommendations, with the exception of one. She advised that the setbacks and FAR's mitigate all of her concerns. She commented that she respects the effort to save the heritage tree, and it looks as if this may be a possibility. She noted that she is a big advocate of the visual analysis and the analysis will be particularly helpful with lots 3 and 4. She stated that if Greenbriar is working Monday through Saturday, and the Commission cannot curtail that activity, it is logical that this applicant should also be allowed to work on Saturday, in that it would help expedite the completion of the project. Mr. Swift suggested that the Commission may wish to differentiate between the subdivision improvements and the actual house construction improvements, as Mr. Bozorgzad stated that he does not PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 17 August 25, 1999