SR 06:201 - Laserfiche WebLink

· General consensus that the location of the northerly portion of the road alignment was consistent with the intent of the V ACSP in that the Specific Plan defined that the use of the Old Vineyard Trail was for alternative transportation methods, that vehicular traffic should be limited where ever possible to crossings only, and that site development should take into consideration the topography of the site. No direction was provided to amend the V ACSP. The proposed road alignment has been modified by moving the entry from the existing road alignment to the westerly boundary. At the time the Planning Commission considered the new location it was depicted acijacent to the west property line. It was relocated 50 feet from the centerline of the drainage swale located on Lot 26, Lands of Brozosky. Staff has since discovered that the VACSP and the EIR restrict construction from occurring within 100 feet of the centerline of Jurisdictional Waters of the u.s. of which this ephemeral drainage way is. The lot grading has been revised/conditioned to stay out of this setback area, however, staff proposes supporting the location in the road in that the access road will align with the existing round about at the end of Thiessen Street, which was built at the time of the Neal School road improvements were constructed. The City is evaluating an initial study and mitigated Negative Declaration providing mitigation measures that would summarily protect the drainageway. However, this document needs to be routed to the State Clearinghouse and distributed to the CA State Dept of Fish and Game. Anticipated mitigation measures for the State's likely concerns during construction have been added as a condition of approval. . General discussion that the City project and proposed PUD development plan should return to the Planning Commission united so that a decision could be reached for both projects. Staff has brought both projects forward to ensure that the decisions made related to the road construction and City tank site are related to and a part of the decision for the PUD development plan lot grading and how the pads integrate with the road grading. Regarding public input at the workshop, Mary Roberts, adjacent neighbor at 1666 Frog Hill Lane, expressed concern with the house location, flat pad grading, and proposed fill for Lot I. She was also concerned that the house location on Lot 3 was moved closer to her house than the location shown on the Specific Plan land use map. Ms. Roberts indicated that she could support a replacement two-story structure on Lot 5 if it were designed similar to the existing home, which has a moderate two-story element covering only a portion of the first floor, has natural wall materials, and is one-story on the side closest to her home. Ms. Roberts supported the applicant's request to reduce the front yard setbacks along the private road. Page - 4