Laserfiche WebLink
<br />r Mr. Bates advised that the installation of the landscaping could not take place until a water meter <br />is set and irrigation could be installed. He advised that a meter could be set after the grading is <br />completed, the underground utilities are in place, the streets are in place, and the pads are cut. <br />He further advised that they will try to place a single story home on Lot 10, noting that 25% of <br />the houses are to be single-story. He noted that typically they like to set the floor plans on the <br />lots to allow variation. He advised that he feels that the hog wire on the corral fencing will give <br />a more institutionalized look. He stated that he would agreed to the hog wire around the <br />perimeter, but would prefer to not install it within the development. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Commissioner Kameny, Mr. Bates advised that the closest house <br />to the Ventana Hills neighborhood which will be on Lot 10 is in excess of 750 feet. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED <br /> <br />Commissioner Arkin asked if the designation of floor plans on individual lots isn't normally <br />shown at the tentative map stage. Mr. Swift advised that this is not a requirement, and that for <br />this PUD the applicant proposed a number of models that were approved, with the ability to <br />place them on lots as demand requires, based on some parameters. The applicant was given the <br />flexibility to make the determination based on its own marketing strategy as the project develops. <br /> <br />,r- <br /> <br />Commissioner Arkin questioned whether a condition could be added giving the first preference <br />to purchase to people who work in the City. Mr. Swift advised that a condition with this <br />requirement could be added. Mr. Bates noted that the applicant would comply with this <br />condition and when the homes are released they would contact the people who work in the City <br />who have indicated an interest and give them the opportunity to purchase a home first. <br /> <br />The Commission reviewed the issues suggested in the staff report for review. <br /> <br />Lotting Configuration - Consensus supporting the lotting configuration. <br /> <br />Emergency Vehicle Access - O.K. <br /> <br />Creek Restoration - In response to a question from Chairperson Sullivan, Mr. Swift confirmed <br />that rock, not concrete, would be used. <br /> <br />Landscaping - Commissioner Roberts supported including tile landscaping condition suggested <br />by staff and the installation of landscaping in the open space area as soon as water is available. <br />She advised that she believes the proposed landscaping will ease the site of the gravel road. <br />Chairperson Sullivan asked if there is a way to install a road surface that doesn't look like a road. <br />Mr. Swift advised that staff explored various options. He further advised that when the PUD was <br />reviewed by the City Council, the Council approved the project with the gravel access road, and <br />that the Planning Commission would need to initiate a modification to the PUD in order to <br />change the road. Discussion ensued regarding alternative materials for the EVA. Chairperson <br />Sullivan stated that he would like to see staff do whatever it can to minimize the visual negativity <br />of a gravel road running through the open space. <br /> <br />,....... <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES <br /> <br />January 10,2001 <br /> <br />Page 5 <br />