PC 050901 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ken Chrisman, 1944 Vineyard A venue, referenced page 78 of the Specific Plan, which stated r- that well water shall be used for irrigation and agricultural uses. He provided information about the well when it was originally drilled and noted that through the drought years the well maintained the same level. He commented that Mr. Brozosky's fears are unfounded. Mr. Chrisman stated that they do not intend to irrigate the property for grazing land, but intend to use the water for the orchard, vineyards, and horses and sheep. He further stated that they will comply with the City ruling that requires them to use domestic water in the house, but noted that they would prefer to stay on the well water. Mr. Chrisman advised that there is no problem with the easements. Commissioner Arkin asked if Mr. Chrisman would be agreeable to a condition that if the capacity of the well drops below a certain point that would threaten Mr. Brozosky's water supply, the Chrismans would stop using the well. Mr. Chrisman said that while he would want to seek legal advice regarding this agreement, he does not see a problem with that stipulation. Pam Chrisman, 1944 Vineyard Avenue, stated that she does not want to give up the well. She noted that well water is not free as there are costs associated with maintenance and equipment. She advised that they have no problem with using the City water in their house if it is a condition. She advised the Commission they were in agreement with the condition allowing the Brozoskys to relocate their pipes and easements as necessary to fit his future development plan. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED r- Commissioner Maas moved to: (1) find that there are no new or changed circumstances which require additional CEQA review of the project, (2) find that the development plan (PUD-S) is consistent with the General Plan and Specific Plan, and (3) recommend approval of Case PUD-S, subject to staffs recommended conditions, with a modification that no structures be allowed on the slope on Lots 1-5. Commissioner Maas advised that with her comments she has made at prior meetings, she supports the project as it stands. The motion died for lack of a second. Commissioner Arkin stated that he would like to address the issues of the project for which he has concerns. The Planning Commission agreed to develop the best possible conditions of approval for the project as presented by Centex Homes, and then to determine what the Planning Commission wanted to do as far as an overall recommendation for the project. The Planning Commission discussed the following issues: Should the fence be on the crest of the hill, or moved down five feet. Commissioner Arkin stated that he would like to have the property line at the top of the hill for Lots 1-5, as this would remove the ability for homeowners to cut down trees and construct accessory structures in the downslope area. - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 9, 2001 Page 5