Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Commissioner Hovingh asked Mr. Hirst if the neighbors have <br />46 lots. Mr. Hirst replied they have not. <br /> <br /> <br />Joe Callahan, 5674 Stoneridge Road, also represented the appIica on; he felt that Mr. Hirst <br />had pretty well covered everything. He mainly wanted to relate e up-grading of Happy <br />Valley Road which is addressed in the conditions. He supported e condition, but notes that <br />it does require the removal of the trestle bridge at the abandoned acific Railway and at least <br />one of the abutments. Having been out a number of times in the ly morning, he said he <br />was amazed at the traffic conditions at the Sunoll Arlington inte tion and was surprised <br />there are not more serious accidents at that location. Because of e neighbors' concerns <br />regarding this situation, they have proposed that the developer co truct the signalization and <br />provide medians on both the north and south side. He did not tho that the proposed project <br />would warrant a signal light, but felt that the safety conditions at e intersection already <br />warranted a signal light. Hence, they have agreed to install signal tion. <br /> <br />Chairman Mahern questioned Mr. Callahan as to whether the cree, when it will be re- <br />directed, will be an open creek. Mr. Callahan said it would be 0 n; when it gets to the <br />street there will be a culvert crossing. They will also hire a ri preservationist to <br />restore the creek, using native grasses, etc. <br /> <br />Commissioner Michelotti discussed with Mr. Callahan the maxim square footage of a <br />house. He explained that the maximum square footage of a house will be a 3.33 FAR, <br />actually throughout the project. <br /> <br />Commissioner McGuirk questioned Mr. Callahan as to the type of retaining walls the project <br />would have. Mr. Callahan indicated this has not yet been decided but they intend to meet <br />again with the neighbors to get their input. <br /> <br />At this point Chairman Mahern asked any of the public who were support of the project to <br />step forward, Out of about 100 people, no one was in support. <br /> <br />Melanie MacGregor, 6546 Arlington Drive, spoke in opposition to the project as a committee <br />member of the Rosepointe neighborhood. She said their consensus is obvious in the petition <br />included in the packet, which amounts to 93 percent of the neigh rhood in Rosepointe. She <br />thanked staff, Mr. Hirst, and Mr. Callahan for working with the n ighbors, even if they are <br />in opposition to the project. She presented a brief slide show sho 'ng the timeline of the <br />project. She noted that on March 16 and March 23 the neighbors et with the developer, <br />who is trying to work with the neighborhood. She said they have any concerns, but will <br />only address the major ones. The major problems are the matter 0 traffic, density of the <br />housing which they feel does not relate well to the rural neighborh , and the soundwalls <br />required by the project because of its proximity to the freeway. e committee feels that the <br />project is being rushed through; that given more time, the neighbo ood and the developers <br /> <br />Minutes Planning Commission <br />March 25, 1992 <br /> <br />Page 15 <br />