PC 08/11/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Michelotti concurs with the views of Commissioner ern, and is also in favor of wording Condition 27 so that all three parties come to som agreement. Regarding the Glenn easement, it is Commissioner Michelotti's opinion that it oesn't make sense not to eliminate the easement and thus eliminate another driveway on Foo . Road. Commissioner Michelotti concurs with the gates as proposed. The point from Mr. MacDonald about establishing definite boundaries is valid. She supports the right of e property owners to be able to say where they want that gate. Commissioner Hovingh advised that he concurs with the rest of the ommission regarding changes to the conditions. However, he indicated that he will vote gainst the PUD modification because he believes good design dictates that the exten ion of C Court goes into the western end of Stoneridge Drive as approved in the initial PUD. He believes the Commission is expending a lot of time dealing with the Glenn ease ent problem consisting of approximately ten trips per day, when roughly a thousand trips r day will be generated by the other residents necessitating heavy usage of Foothill Road, w ereby the thousand trips per day should be funneled onto Stoneridge Drive and give those Ie the option of going directly into Hacienda Business Park without having to make left an right hand turns onto Foothill Road. Chairman McGuirk concurred that the easement was just bad planni g and didn't make much sense. He would like to see the gates just off B Court and at the M ller property line, and would like Boulevard Development to work with the landowners to to improve that road as much as they can since they are being impacted because of the d elopment. Chairman McGuirk believes that the natural habitat area could potentially cau problems to the amphibians and/or people. He also believes this development will b an added feature to the north end of the city and believes it would be nice to go and admire it, thus, he is not in favor of the gated community. Chairman McGuirk welcomes the ch ge from townhouses to single family homes. He concurs with the rest of the statements of e Commission concerning the conditions of approval and supports the PUD modifI tion. In response to Commissioner Michelotti, Mr. Higdon explained Con ition 15 to be one-half the cost of undergrounding the utility lines for the length of the deve opment's frontage on Foothill Road. Commissioner Finch believes this project to be a very complete and etailed plan. He is happy to see the size of the single family homes and commends the eveloper for an excellent job in design. The fact that Foothill Road is now going to e lighted adds to the safety of the residents. He stated that he cannot support Dr. Glenn' request to maintain his easement because of safety reasons. A motion was made by Commissioner Wright, seconded by Co . ioner Mahem, making a rmding that no new information of significance has bee discovered which would affect the previous approval of the Negative Declaration ~ PUD-90-19, m..lcing PUD rmdings for the proposed development plan for Case PUD- 19-2M, and recommending approval of Case PUD-90-19-2M, subject to the c nditioDS listed in Exhibit "B.I." Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 1993 Page 10