PC 11/30/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Finch commented that when he was building on Jorge sen Lane were nine walnut trees on the site, with seven of those infested. He questioned staff as to how many of the trees on the project site were healthy. Mr. Swift replied that the st of the trees will be studied at a later time. mE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Brad Hirst, 6280 W. Las Positas Boulevard, Suite 220, represented e application. A rendering of the project was displayed. He responded to Commissio er Finch's question about the expiration date of growth management approval, stating th the project's growth management expires December 31, 1994. g so cooperative. He d felt they would be Mr. Hirst commended the neighbors on all sides of the project for stated that the neighbors appear to be very pleased with the project very proud of it when it is complete. In regard to the walnut trees on the site, Mr. Hirst stated they have ly studied the 200 trees that will be affected by the roadway. He said about 20 of tho will be saved; generally speaking most of the 200 trees are in poor condition. He f er noted that the conditions of approval state that when the trees are removed they mu t be replaced on a two for one basis of an orchard type of tree. Mr. Hirst referred to No. 13 of the revised conditions of approval an asked that it be amended to add "or until an interim EVA is removed". Hopefully it would be only a few years until the temporary EVA is removed. Mr. Hirst referred to the revised Condition 19 in reference to storm age. It is conceivable they may have to install storm drainage for the eastern fi e acres of their project to drain to the north and west. It is possible they may be able to mplish this, with the approval of the City Engineer, with a daylight ditch. If they can ac mplish this with a daylight ditch, they would pay for the cost of this; however, he felt t if they must construct a permanent storm drain line across the Chu property, they should receive full reimbursement, not partial reimbursement; full reimbursement only 0 the party that crosses the adjoining property. Commissioner Wright asked for clarification on the partial reimburse ent for the storm drain. Mr. Swift explained that the Subdivision Map Act requires th t anyone who upsizes an improvement to serve a downstream property, can be reimbursed or that. That is why the condition refers to a partial reimbursement. It is not known whe er the same size line will be required, with or without this project. If it is the same size e for just the Chu property as well as whatever comes off of this project, it will probab y be 100 percent reimbursement. On the other hand, if the line is required to be over . , then it will be partial reimbursement. Gene Lauer, 2221 Martin Avenue, stated that he lived on the five-ac parcel adjacent to the project. He said he is generally pleased with the project. He referr to page 4, last Planning Commission Minutes November 30, 1992 Page 6