PC 10/23/1991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. lserson responded to Mr. Sbutts' concern regarding Condition 37. He pointed out that the fee would be payable within one month of the approval of the PUD. The idea is that PanCal will be doing the improvements which should be getting underway soon and in all fairness, they should be reimbursed. Mr. Shutts expressed concern that as yet the applicant does not even have the loan in place and did not know if this could be done so quickly. Further discussion ensued as to what "sufficient security" means. Mr. Iserson said this term means performance bond, letter of credit, or some financial guarantee of some sort. Mr. Shutts further discussed the matter, noting that the Hempy project did not have to do this type of thing. He reiterated that he is willing to contribute to the cost of the improvements, but objected to the term "upon demand". Mr. Higdon injected that in most cases these fees are paid at the time of the final map. Mr. Iserson continued to say that the City is presently involved in somewhat of a "juggling" act: they are trying to coordinate improvement of Foothill Road among several different property owners, none of whom are very happy with the way things are going; PanCal is not pleased that they are the ones who have to put up-front money for the improvements. The City's hope is to get everyone to cooperate and get the improvements done. They feel for PanCal to get the job done they have to be reimbursed in a timely manner. Further lengthy discussion ensued on the issue of "upon demand" in Condition 37. Mr. Shutts felt that a tree report was not necessary. He noted that if they were working in the dripline area he could agree with this, but as it was he felt it was superfluous. ,- Commissioner Hovingh discussed Conditions 5 and 16 with Mr. Shutts and asked if he would have any problem with this should the setback from Foothill Road be 150 ft. Mr. Shutts said he would have no problem with this. Commissioner Hovingh expressed some concern about the possibility of a solid fence on Foothill Road. Commissioner Michelotti felt this could be worked out at the Design Review Board stage. Mike Kliment, resident on Foothill Road, stated he is in full agreement with the applicant and supports the application. He briefly discussed the future alignment of Foothill Road with Mr. Iserson. Peter MacDonald, 400 Main Street, supported the application. He said the comments about the school impact fees got his attention, and wished to state that he felt the school district could build a school, if one is necessary, for $19,000 per student which would be derived from development fees. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Minutes Planning Commission Meeting October 23, 1991 Page 10 I. .