PC 10/28/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Item S,d, T n i n II Bank Application for a one-year extension of Tentative Tract Map 63 9 for the property located at the north side of Vineyard Avenue at Clara Lane, Z Ding for the property is PUD (Planned Unit Development) - MDR (Medium Density Resi ential) District. Mr. Swift presented the staff report recommending approval of the ne-year extension of Tract Map 6339 subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. e also called attention to a memo from the City Attorney in regard to whether new condition may be attached when granting an extension of a tentative map. He stated that the City A orney has stated that the Planning Commission has the following options: (1) approve the e ension with all conditions as originally approved, or (2) deny the extension. ber 31, 1992 and e for the applicant. Mr. ap approval. He noted e. Growth Management Commissioner Mahern noted that the extension would expire Dece questioned staff as whether a couple of months would be enough ti Swift indicated that two months should be enough time to get final that coming up with the finances is the major requirement at this s approval would also expire on December 31, 1992. TIlE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Ron Archer, 4113 Mohr Avenue, represented the applicant and stat that he has read the conditions of approval and concurs with them. He responded to Co missioner Mahern's concern and stated that the two month time frame would be adequat , but has no problem if it is extended for a full year. He noted that to get the approval for he tentative map costs $2,000 to extend it for several months. He suggested that in the fu re when tentative maps are approved that they be concurrent with Growth Management, so at the applicant can avoid some costs. Commissioner Mahern asked Mr. Archer if he felt he could have th tentative map ready by December 31, 1992. Mr. Archer felt that he could be ready by that time; right now it's ready to be signed after the money is secured. Commissioner Michelotti asked Mr. Archer to clarify his comments regarding the tentative map fee. Mr. Archer said that two years ago the fee was $250 to fi e a tentative map. However, the City has raised the fee to $2,000 which is a big differ nee. To get the extension, it will cost him $2,000 rather than $250. He felt that for a small developer who may only have several lots this could create quite a burden. He sai an extension could cost $2,000 plus another $2,000 to file another tentative map next year. He felt it would be more feasible to have the tentative map coincide with Growth Managemen . TIlE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED, Planning Commission Minutes October 28, 1992 Page 4