PC 05/14/97 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Cooper took exception to some of the previous speaker's comments. This is not staff's plan. It is brought to staff by the applicants, and the development plan was approved by the elected officials back in 1989. Jim Canslen, 7925 Colonial Court, lives directly across from the adobe across Foothill Road. He was also told that the adobe building would be used as a residence or a museum. He has a major concern about the noise levels in his rear yard caused by the extra traffic. He is also afraid of the safety hazard that some drunk driver will not negotiate the turn and drive through his fence. Also, his home is eight feet below the grade of Foothill, and he is concerned about the visual impact of the car headlights shining into his residence and yard. Mr. Canslen does not want to allow alcohol use at the adobe. He is opposed to the application and feels the adobe should remain as a private residence. Dwight Pedersen, 2117 Black Oak Ct., was also advised that the adobe would be a private residence when he was in the process of purchasing his lot. He does not believe that one caretaker can adequately secure this building for 14 hour a day, 7 days a week. Security at Golden Eagle is limited. Illegal parking in the neighborhoods is a concern. Mr. Pedersen is opposed to the application and wants the adobe to remain a private residence. Katherine Pittenger, 1912 Toyon Court, handed in a signed petition opposing the event center. She is opposed to the application. She was told by the sales personnel the adobe would be a private residence. Why would people buy these lots if it were known the adobe would be a special events center? The same holds true for Oak Tree Farms and the Renaissance Faire. Such a disclosure would have an impact on sales. Ms. Pittenger believes the Currin Company operates very unethically. The night before a car of three teenagers careened down Golden Eagle Way and hit a tree, one was hospitalized. The residents do not trust the Currin Company to uphold the conditions. Please deny this request. Earl Riggs, 8519 Lupine Court, noted that the adobe was determined not to be adequate for a clubhouse for the residents. He advised that the land use was changed in May 1989 and the auction of the lots was held in November 1989. It is reasonable for the purchasers to rely on the developers to disclose accurate data. The Currins should have provided a disclaimer to all purchasers. He is concerned that there will be two clubhouses at the entrance to the development. Mr. Riggs is amazed that it has taken years for the use permit to come forward for approval. He commented that he thought the special event center was to contribute to the Bernal traffic signal. He wants the fencing to be consistent with what is there. ADA requirements must be adhered to. Regarding the previous comments about the length of time for this development, Mr. Beougher advised that this is a zoning issue and it stays in effect until modified. Yetta DeHart, 2173 Inverness Court, asked that the caretaker application be denied. Concerned that the caretaker will enforce the conditions. If the clubhouse was found to be impractical to be a clubhouse, how can it now be found to be acceptable for a conference center? Any necessary upgrading would be applicable regardless of use. It is their opinion that they were lied to by the sales personnel regarding the use of the adobe. Comparisons were made with the Century House, and the speaker does not feel these are equal comparisons. Soundwalls vs. open fencing; 6 lane road vs. two-lane country road that has been washed out in the last two winters; Century House has Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 May 14, 1997 --,-----_..._,._..~,._--,---_._'''''-_._'--_.-