PC 02/26/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

In response to Chairman Mahern's question, Mr. Swift replied tha the houses surrounding the proposed site are around 2,700 to 2,800 sq. ft. with a 35 per nt FAR. Commissioner Hovingh said he was opposed to the project becau he could not make the findings in regard to infrastructure. At this time he could not sup rt the project. Mr. Swift explained to Commissioner Hovingh that it is mainly th water line that staff is concerned about. To allow the project to go forward, they would ve to make some kind of compromises in relation to cost. He further explained that the se er lines could go to the east and through the fairgrounds. Water lines would not loop to alley Avenue. The applicant would have to pay a share of the water line cost once it ets built, but this could be quite some time yet. The biggest issue is what happens if the line gets interrupted; then they may not have adequate water. He noted that it is basically the e as having two accesses to a street. infrastructure and the ttle too dense at four lots, ne small one. She could Commissioner Michelotti said she also has some concerns about fact that this is a rural type area. She felt the project would be a and that it might be too difficult to market three large homes with only support a three-lot plan. Mr. Swift said the applicant does have the option of appealing a d nial to Council. ~ Commissioner McGuirk said he appreciated Commissioner Hovin infrastructure and felt there was merit to that thought. He stated lot project. 's concern about the would rather see a three- Commissioner Horan noted that a small farm-type house with larger ones could probably work as he has observed the renovation of an older farm house in Livermore and felt it was attractive. However, he felt that in the long run it was ore feasible to support a three-lot project and send it on to Council. In this manner the app icant could appeal. Commissioner Wright stated he also felt a three-lot configuration as ultimately the best choice. He would approve it as stated in the staff report. Chairman Mahern thought four large lots were simply too much ti the area. She would favor a three-lot development and felt that infrastructure would be ufficient. She also liked the ideas expressed by Commissioner McGuirk in relation to a co gelcarriage home, but did not think it was the Commission's responsibility to redesign the pI' ~ect. A motion was made by Commissioner Michelotti, seconded by Co missioner Horan recommending approval of the Negative Declaration prepared for ase PUD-91-05. Minute. Planning Commi..iOD Fcbmary 26, 1992 PapS