Laserfiche WebLink
<br />r- <br /> <br />In response to Commissioner Arkin's suggestion that the vineyards be installed before the <br />last close of escrow, Mr. Ebrahimi replied that they were not opposed to that idea. They <br />had originally requested that, but tried to accommodate staff's issues in that regard. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift replied that staff strongly opposed tying the plantings to any close of escrow, <br />and that they would like some mechanism to ensure that the plantings were completed. <br />He noted that performance bonds were normally effective, but added that some <br />developers walked away from bonds. He noted that the City could require a performance <br />bond, but would rather not have the City involved with planting a vineyard if the bond <br />requirements were not fulfilled. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kameny noted that seasonal and weather conditions may complicate the <br />vineyard component of the bond. <br /> <br />In response to Commissioner Arkin's question regarding the cost of planting and <br />irrigating the vineyard, Mr. Swift replied that it would cost approximately $15,000 per <br />acre. <br /> <br />Assistant City Attorney Larissa Seto advised that a performance bond was effectively a <br />contract with an insurance company, which effectively guaranteed that the work would be <br />done. If Greenbriar were to walk away from the contract and not complete it, the City <br />would ask the insurance or bonding company to send a contractor to do the work. There <br />r- may be some time delay, but City would end up whole in the process. <br /> <br />Mr. Ebrahimi advised that this issue was no different from any other community tract <br />with common area landscaping, which normally required a performance bonds. He noted <br />that it was in the interest of the homeowner to plant the vineyards, and Greenbriar wanted <br />them to be in place. He would be amenable to having a performance bond attached to this <br />proj ect. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift advised that staff preferred a performance bond, but that it would require a <br />more detailed plan than what was contained in the PUD plan. <br /> <br />Chairperson Maas stated that she had not problem with the performance bond, and <br />pointed out that Greenbriar had a long-standing reputation within the City. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kameny liked staff's recommendation that the last building permit would <br />be withheld until the vineyards were planted. <br /> <br />Mr. Ebrahimi noted that would limit Greenbriar if the last building permit were not <br />pulled, because that would force them to build the last house individually. <br /> <br />Chairperson Maas advised that they would discuss that issue further in the future. <br /> <br />".-. <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES <br /> <br />July 10, 2002 <br /> <br />Page 13 <br />