Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes <br />Planning Commissio <br />November 26, 1985 <br />Commissioner Innes then discussed Alternative No. 3 and visual <br />impacts. Mr. Fairfield explained that the homes will be visible <br />until the landscaping grows but that this is the same situation <br />for Castlewood Country Club and other areas under development. <br />Commissioner Innes asked about the comment on the plan relating <br />to sidewalks on both sides of Foothill Road. Mr. Fairfield <br />explained that the wording should be changed to say "shoulders <br />---... install a turn lane". Commissioner Innes asked why Mr. <br />Fairfield is not in favor of sidewalks. Mr. Fairfield indicated <br />he is in favor of internal sidewalks to get homeowners to the <br />tennis courts and other areas. Commissioner Innes then asked <br />about the fencing proposed for the development. Mr. Fairfield <br />said they did not want wooden fences like lower 12 Oaks. Their <br />fences will be kid and animal proof but you will be able to see <br />through them. <br />Discussion between Commissioner Innes, Hoyt and Mr. Fairfield <br />then ensued addressing cuts and removal of dirt from the property <br />with various plans submitted. <br />Commissioner Michelotti then addressed density on the east and <br />west sides of Foothill Road. Mr. Fairfield indicated that west <br />side of Foothill Road would be 3-4 per acre or larger. The <br />custom lots on the east side of Foothill would be a minimum of <br />20,000 sq. ft. with the townhouses being approximately 4,000 sq. <br />ft. depending upon the patio area of each unit. <br />Commissioner Lindsey spoke to the staging area and access to the <br />park. He asked if it was eliminated whether or not there would <br />be any significant changes to the road. Mr. Fairfield indicated <br />that no access to the park would probably cause the road to <br />revert back to a private one. He pointed out that buses, etc. <br />would use the road to the park. Commissioner Lindsey asked how <br />many homes could be put in the staging area assuming the lots <br />were one acre in size. Mr. Fairfield indicated it would depend <br />on the geological limitations, but he doubted there would be <br />sufficient water and thus it would violate the 670' contour which <br />they do not wish to do. <br />Commissioner Lindsey asked Mr. Fairfield to review the Planting <br />on Alternative No. 3. Mr. Fairfield complied. <br />Commissioner Michelotti asked if the entire development was moved <br />uphill if it would decrease the impacts. Mr. Fairfield indicated <br />it would increase the impacts. <br />Chairman Wilson asked what the development time schedule looks <br />like. Mr. Fairfield stated that they would have to comply with <br />the Growth Management Program and it would appear to him that <br />development would probably be 7-8 years off. Chairman Wilson <br />then asked if it would be possible to start the foresting prior <br />to that time to get it going. Mr. Fairfield explained that they <br />can start planting with the very first unit of the project. <br />Commissioner Lindsey asked if he would start planting with <br />approval of the final map. Mr. Fairfield indicated they could <br />- 7 - <br />