PC 11/10/99 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Sullivan requested that additional information be provided on the noise issues. He stated that there are inconsistencies between the EIR and Negative Declaration relating to traffic, noise and dust impacts. He requested that houses be set back from the Arroyo and he noted that the Commission preferred that buffers be installed between the arroyo and developments to eliminate visibility issues and encroachment on the arroyo. Commissioner Maas requested that a slide show be presented to the Commission of the arroyo area. Chairperson Roberts expressed concern with Mr. Costas care of the property and noted that development of the property could be an improvement because the property has not been actively farmed since the previous ownership and has basically returned to the wild; it could harbor sensitive wildlife which would invalidate a negative declaration. Commissioner Sullivan expressed disagreement with the Negative Declaration and statements that there are no impacts on noise, aesthetics, the obstruction of views, and plant and animal impacts. He inquired whether a survey has been performed on plant or animal species. Chairperson Roberts noted this area is a wildlife corridor and so designated in the General Plan. Commissioner Maas expressed concurrence with the other Commissioners' concerns but expressed hesitation in repeating procedures for this site. Commissioner Sullivan noted that the Negative Declaration does not address potential impacts and is not adequate. Further, he commented on the amenity offered by the developer and he stated that an alternative would be for the developer to not contribute to the amenities and remove two lots to allow for a buffer adjacent to the arroyo. He expressed concurrence with Mr. Brozosky to time this development with the infrastructure and with the development of houses being timed to opening of the school. Discussion ensued relating to the removal of trees. Commissioner Sullivan requested that the tree report be reissued to the Commission. Commissioner Maas requested that the trail map be issued to the Commission. She expressed concern with the fencing and requested that there be more open fencing in the project. She noted she would not be in favor of this development being built prior to the McGuire and Nevis developments. Commissioner Kumaran noted a majority of his concerns have been covered by the other Commissioners. He noted he would be in support of timing completion of the infrastructure and the schools to the development. He noted his concurrence with the Commissioner's statements relating to the trail buffer and performance of a visual analysis. Further, he commented on the amenity offered by the developer and stated that he would be in support of suggesting that there be one unit per acre to allow for a buffer and that the one-acre density be considered as the amenity. Commissioner Roberts noted she concurred with the other Commissioner's statements. Commissioner Arkin requested that staff provide the distance between the airport and development. Commissioner Maas initiated discussion relating to the Commissioner's thoughts on cookie-cutter design for homes. She suggested that staff provide a map of the location of houses and elevations of PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 12 November 10, 1999