PC 08/27/1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

feet. 7-he staff report indicated the reverse. He pointed this oat on the rendering. C:ommi ssi an er Mi chel ott i asked Mr Harvey 3 f he i ratend=, to i mpr-ova the road to the Grimm prop arty. He said they intend to i rnprove t-he road t-o tt,a tie-i n to the Gr i mrn pr-op arty Mr . Harvey noted that staff i s pur s~.ai ng the i r,stal 1 ati or, of some type of strt_a c.t mare i n the sc.eni c easem Brat _ He was not i n favor of any addi t i. onal structure to the ra_a r-al area. He said tt,at Al Dutcl-~ovc=r t,ad deli gned a 1 and sc aping p 1 an to enhance tt,a rat i va species that current 1 y exist at the site. Ha felt that the of eander~s on the si to provi de for a>:cel 1 ant screer,i ng , i, n addition to tt,a rest of the planned landscaping. Mr_ Harvey fa..arther addressed access and ci rca_al ati or, on page 7: he st at_ed that t,e was i r, di sagr Bement wi th staff ' s rec ommendat i on on that i ss~ae. He sa_ag gent ed an al terraat i ve road that woa_al d go bat wean the Stevenson and O1 son property. Mr. Harvey addressed the F'UD f i ndi ngs: He said this gets to the crux of the issue i n that a 1.°_s0 f t . setbacF: would el i mi Hate every hoa_ase from Bernal to jL.ast past Jorgenson Lana_ He felt that bet aa_ase of the e:: i sti ng hot_ases that are not i n compl i ante with, that 15Ca ft 5etbac4-:, that his project sh ot_ald be ~~llowed to be built wi thout a i Ste, f t. setbac4z and requested a wai ve of that rac7 t_al ati on. Ira addition, Mr_ Harvey disagreed wi tt, staff r-egar-ding the density and not se i ssa_aa. Reg ardi nq Condition 6, Mr. Harvey proposed a 2C> ft. satbac4=:, Coa~di ti on -7 -- t,e was opposed to a t,omeown ers associ ati ores. He felt a mai nten ante agreement could provi de for care of the scenic easement. Condition 1Ca - Ha reiterated that he did not thi ra 4~ this contli ti on was appropr-i at e. Condition 1~' - t-le said it rep eat ad Condi ti on 7. Condition 14 - h-ie said this was the first times he aver heard of this condition and felt it was very unfair to add a new condition at such a 1 ate date _ He said i f 9. t was needed , that the original pl an should go into of f ec-t . Condi ti or, 18 - He said this was an otter new condi ti or,. Ha did not 4~now the poi nt of purchasing this pro art p y as he felt the ri gta~t--of ~~-way handled that. Condi ti or, 19 - He sai<~ this was another new condition and made no sense as the 1 ots have very little sl opa_ Cor,di ti on 26 - He said tt,is was another new condi t i on ~ i t had never been di sca..assad wi th st off and t,e i=e1 t i t was anti re'l.y oat of line. He e:apr essed dismay tt,at he has worFeed for 1;~ moraths ore the plans, na_amer ous meetings with staff , and har> gone through si>: differ ant pl ar,ner-s on the projec-t. Chairman Berger as4¢etl Mr. Harvey who owns the buff er strip that he mentioned in Condition 18. Mr. Harvey said h'Irs. Iamb, a nei ghbor i ng property owner , owns=d tt,at strip M I NUl-ES PIANN I NG U'OMM I SS I ON Junes ~7, 1990 Pages 16