PC 10/25/89 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr _ k::l i. ment s vi ew wi. th havi- ng a t'fou se on the 1 ong 1 of that c ot_a :L d 1 ooL~ down on his pr op erty_ She wa~al d 1 i. 4::e to see the 1 of al i gnmant :i n Al tarnat i. ve Chang ad to maF: e i t more of a ~?<'~ ~ Ga<~~~ square foot 1 of and be able to position ttae hot_ese more at an angl a_ Commi ssi drier Hovi ngh stated he cot_al d riot support any oif the al terra .~ti vas_ He thoa_agNt the area deserved a Spec i. -f i c F'1 an and feels much more thoa_aght sh oul d qo i r-ato any devea op meets i n the Faat1-ai 11 ar aa_ 1-ia was corn c=c=-rraed t_I~at pi<=c ertacal pr o,j ac is would be coml. nq forward and i~el t tFa i. s pro ja=ct i s st=:tti nq a precedent _ Ha encaur ag ed the Commi ssi on to ask: for a Sp eci f i c Pl an for the area _ Ha stressed that he opposed the Brat i re p:L an _ Commi ssi on er Horan favor-ed Al ternat i ve ~ bec-au se he sh~zr ed the concerns r-eg ardi nq soundwal 2 s ~ and felt the access road could qo a little c.l oser to Foothill Road_ He felt that No_ 2 wot_eld eliminate the effect of rowhouses_ Chaff rrnar'a Mi.che.l ot-ti as4<ed Mr_ S'w i-ft what type of ti maf rame is reya_ai red to cio a Spec i -f i c fF'1 an _ Wir _ Swift said this ~t sa_aal 1 y ta4:es guff to a 1 ong t i me ~ and i s very costly _ He had bean i of or mad by a con su:L tent that each parcel has to have its own study at: a cost of ~1vo ~ OU<:l eaci-a _ Commi ssi on er Mc Vt_ei rF~ commented that he would agree wi t:h Commi ssi on er tiovi ngh and cou2 d nat support the pro-j act _ tie f el t tl-aat_ great= care ma_ast be tit Ften in ttais area Arad if the pr-o-jest war-e appr oved~ tic= woa..eld favor only one 1-ao~asa per aere_ A rnoti on was made by Commi ssi. on er Hovi. nqh ~ seconded by Chairman Mi chcl otti recommending approval o~f~ t_t~e Negative Decl ar ati ore pr ep arE:d far Case PL1D-88-16 inasmuch as project approval wool d have arz insignificant ad var se of f act on the envi rc~n ment _ ROLL CALL VOTE AYES= Commi ssi. on er's Lt p_r gar ~ Horan ., Hovi ngh ~ Mah ern ~ and Chaff. rman Michel «tti N(~E-8 s Nonc-~ A lEt ~iEN'7': IVane ABS TAINo None Rascal t_eti on No_ F'G-89--5'S was entered and adopted rc:commendi ng approval of t=Faa Nag ati va Dacl ar ati on pr ep ar-ad for Case PIJD--88~-16 as motion ed. A motion was made by Commi ssi orier Ser gar ~ sac onded by Chaff r-mara Mi. che~l ot'ti finding that the proposed devr=lop mart plan i s corasi st ant wi th the Gen oral P1 an and meets the purposes of the PlJD or-tl i.nance~ and recommending approval of Case PIJD-88~-16 approv:i rag Al tern at i ve No_ v. ~ sub jec't to the condi ti ons of the st a-ff report and adding the condi ti.ons as note=d by staff regarding fencing and the pasi t i on of a 1-~oa_a s<= an Lot 4 _ Page 6