PC 05/11/1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

~- Commissioner Hovingh inquired if Mr. Shutts had any concerns regarding the proposed restriction against constructing a tennis court or sportcourt on this property (proposed Condition 8). Mr. Shutts responded by stating there is not adequate space for a tennis court on this lot, therefore, he and the applicant would not have a concern with the restriction. In response to Commissioner Mahern, Mr. Shutts believes there is only a 50% probability that the other homes that have been approved would be built due to the decline in that type of housing market. Chairman McGuirk sought clarification of the tentative agreement. Staff stated they have no details of the fmancial and maintenance agreements at this time, though Mr. Swift had the understanding that Mr. Kliment would close his private drive on Foothill and use the new road. Chairman McGuirk raised the issue of the Foothill Road widening project. Mr. Swift stated the City had intended to finish the widening of Foothill Road with revenue generated from the Garms project, the Ku/Newnam project, and the Thomas project. Mr. Swift believes the City will ask the Thomas project to pay their share and the City will pay the balance so the Foothill Road widening project can go forward. -~ Commissioner Michelotti inquired about the type of fencing required and whether landscaping would be included along the open fencing. Mr. Shutts thought solid fencing would be used between the residences to provide privacy, and open fencing would be used elsewhere. On this particular lot, only opening fencing will be used. Commissioner Wright felt fifteen months was an adequate amount of time for the road construction. He proposed that a bond be posted at the 15 month time limit, and if the road is not completed at the end of 24 months, the bond would be forfeited. Commissioner Wright does not want an open-ended project. Mr. Shutts declined to agree to this proposal for Mr. Thomas. In response to Commissioner Mahern, Mr. Shutts advised that no construction work has started. Furthermore, the completed engineering work needs to be revised and re-approved by Staff. Jerrell Thomas, 5226 Foothill Road, stated his one concern with the staff report and conditions was the fifteen month deadline and would like see the deadline extended. Mr. Thomas proposed that at the time the engineering work is approved, he would post a bond for the full amount of financing for the road construction. He feels this would guarantee the City a finished project. Mr. Thomas stated that he and his neighbors have come together and have written letters outlining their agreement, soon to be developed into a legal contract. ~ Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 May 11, 1994