Laserfiche WebLink
<br />This has been added as a condition of approval for the water tank. <br /> <br />. General consensus that the temporary stockpiling of excavated soil could be placed as <br />proposed within lots 6 and 7. <br /> <br />The plans have developed much further and there is clear delineation from previous <br />documents that the drainage swale on lot 4 and 6 are considered Jurisdictional Waters of <br />the Us. and construction must be kept 100 feet clear. The pad configuration on Lot 6 has <br />been revised and there is not an opportunity to place material at that location. The City <br />has been discussing where a staging area might be and Mr. Reznick indicated he may be <br />demolishing the existing residential structure on Lot 7 in that it is an attractive nuisance, is <br />unsafe and not habitable with the costs of the repairs greater than the value of the <br />structure. For that reason, the City believes it would be a good location to elevate the pad <br />area and use the site as a staging area. When the tank site is complete, the excess material <br />will either be used by the Reznick pad grading, or off hauled from the site. <br /> <br />. General consensus that the location of the lots and the tank site were consistent with the <br />intent of the V ACSP in that the 'blobs' where the residences and the tank site were located <br />met the design and location criteria accordingly. No direction was provided to amend the <br />VACSP. <br /> <br />The project layout is the same as that viewed at the time of the workshop with the tank site <br />in the relative central location between Lots 6 and 7 which necessitated moving one of the <br />entitled lots of the Reznick development down to the lower elevation at the northerly <br />portion of the site. <br /> <br />. General consensus that the grading plan, road alignment, and cut and fill pad construction <br />were difficult to read and requested better plans, and poles placed on the site for Lots I <br />and 2. There was general concern that the fill pads on these lots in addition to the <br />allowance by the V ACSP would create an unpleasant view when walking along the Old <br />Vineyard Trail. No direction was provided to amend the V ACSP. <br /> <br />The applicant has revised the proposed development areas on Lots 1 and 2 resulting in the <br />graded home site to be able to be moved away from the Old Vineyard Trail frontage. The <br />sites also have the smallest of the allowable home square footage. Staff also worked with <br />the applicant to require that the homes on Lots 1 and 2 will have 'front elevations' facing <br />Old Vineyard. <br /> <br />This has been added as a condition of approval for the PUD. <br /> <br />Page - 3 <br />