SR 06:013 - Laserfiche WebLink

. Impacts to the Jones' property should be minimized related to grading and drainage and requested that the applicant be required to submit complete improvement plans at the time of the PUD approval by the Planning Commission and the City Council; . Concern related to the circulation plan; and, . Concern that the appropriate CEQA process had not taken place. The Planning Commission amended the conditions of approval related to some of these concerns. These included requiring that Lot 9, the custom home lot, be required to conform to the design guidelines and by design to attempt to mitigate neighbors' impacts, be processed as a design review application to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission; amending and including Conditions of Approval Nos. 119 to 130 related to the Jones' property and including Conditions of Approval Nos. 131 to 132 related to the westerly Alteri property; and requiring that a sign be posted at the end of Rose Avenue indicating it may be extended for future development and that it be provided within disclosures in the CC&Rs as well as posted in the sales office. The Planning Commission staff report and minutes of the hearing are attached (Attachments 15 and 16). The realigned access to the Jones' property continues to be an issue that will need to be resolved prior to a final subdivision map being recorded. The Jones family will need to abandon the existing access easement which lies to the westerly boundary of the smaller existing parcel shown on the plan entitled, "Demolition Plan and Cross Sections." The applicant will then grant a new 20-foot access easement for the benefit of the Jones family which will connect Street A to the Jones' property. The proposed easement is physically located along the northerly boundary of the proposed Lot 9, the custom home lot. Mr. David Jones has suggested that the proposed 20-foot access easement is inadequate and should be designed as a standard residential road section to accommodate and serve as the primary entrance to the Jones' property should the family wish to subdivide. City staff discussed this as an alternative and determined that it would not be desirable to have this as a standard street which would cut through the Roselyn Lane project area. Should the Jones family wish to subdivide, access would be provided with both Calico Lane and the proposed Street B of the Roselyn Lane project. The City received a letter dated December 12, 2005 from Mr. David Jones (Attachment 17). His letter discusses the previous 1995 project proposal related to circulation and proposes that the City Council consider the 1995 circulation proposal as a preferred alternative to the proposed project. David Jones also presented a plan that he drew and submitted it to the Planning Commission on November 16,2005 for consideration. A copy of that plan was not provided to staff; however, his letter discusses the 1995 circulation proposals. At that time, there were various circulation proposals that were reviewed by staff, the Planning Commission, and the City Council. The discussion of various circulation patterns was directly related to the issue of whether Rose Avenue would be extended to Valley Avenue and, if so, what configuration would best meet the needs of the residents. The text below is an excerpt of the 1995 staff report: SR 06:013 Page 8 of 17