PC 01/27/88 - Laserfiche WebLink

fir. Swift presented the staff report, recommending tt-ee Commission tat.e public testimony concerning the proposed project and the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR and in the staff report, and provide staff with policy directions and direct tl-"ie applicant to revise the site pi an accordi rigi y for the Co~~~rrii ssi on ' s review at a I ester- date. He sal d Chandler Lee wool d respond to their- questions. He also noted a letter had been receivEd this evening from the Preserve urea Ridgt=Tands Committee and copies were made for the Commissioners. 3~ii ke 3"1cF=::i ssi ck: , F'resi dent of F'resi ey of (Northern Cai i f orni a, 1S ins h7t. Diablo Filvd. , Walnut Creet~, represented the application, stating he has reviewed the staff conditions. He gave the bacttground of the proposed project. He noted that the major questions have to do with the project density but he felt the proposed density of •T5b units was appropriate for the area. He addressed the conflict regarding grading on F'Ieasanton Ridge, statir•.g i-,e felt the term "massive grading" #-iad been miscoristrued. He did not see a need to separate out a number of part::s in ttae area. Chai r-man Lindsey ast~:ed ~1r . Mck::i ssi ct~ i f the staging area was a parting lot. He responded that was his understanding of a staging area and pointed out that location on tt-ee rendering of the pr oject. Commissiorser Hoyt asked the applicant to point out where slides could impact the Iots. The applicant went to the rendering and noted the area which the engineers believed to Ge a slide area that would !-rave to be repaired in order to build the Iots. if economics proves that it is not feasible to repair this area, those Lots proposed for that area would not Ge Guilt. Commissioner t''lichelotti asked applicant about the cut and fill near C Street. He said this is a fill operation where the grade is brought from the existing "v" configuration to a ie:~ei plane. He added that at Lot 1~D tt-3ere would be about a ~~i ft. fill and tt-,ought that would be the lowest paint. Commissioner Derger inquired about the ~~~ ft. cut on the entry road mentioned in the staff report. !"1r. Mci~;issict~ said he thougt-~t that was supposed to be a 6U f t . si ope, not a cut . 1'rr . Lee explained it as a 6U ft. difference in elevation between the road bed and where the top of the hill could be seen after it was graded. Chairman Lindsey asked the applicant what is the proposed sire of the pads. He said Cher-e would tae a minimum of Es~~~u sq. ft. pads on ail the streets. The public hearing was opened. F'age ~