Laserfiche WebLink
MATTERS FOR COMMISSION'S REVIEW <br />Newspaper Dispenser Study <br />This matter was continued to 1/26/83, 7:45 p,m. <br />Tract 4588, Stoneson Development Company <br />Application of Stoneson Development Company for an extension of <br />tentative tract approval which would allow a 158 dwelling unit resi- <br />dential subdivision on a 13.4 acre site located immediately south <br />of Stoneridge Drive between Pleasant Hill Road and Springdale Avenue, <br />Zoning for the property is RM-2500 (Multiple-Family Residential) <br />District. <br />This matter was continued indefinitely at the request of the applicant, <br />Tract 5114, Chang Su-0 Lin <br />Application of Chang Su-O Lin for tentative subdivision approval of <br />a 50 lot residential subdivision of approximately 9.6 acres of land <br />located on the east side of Muirwood Drive between Pecan Court and <br />Lemonwood Way, Zoning for the property is PUD (Planned Unit Development)- <br />Medium Density Residential District, A Negative Declaration of <br />environmental impacts will also be considered. <br />Tract 5115, Chang Su-O Lin <br />Application of Chang Su-0 Lin for tentative subdivision approval of <br />a 71 unit townhouse residential subdivision of approximately 6,5 acres <br />of land located on the east side of Muirwood Drive between West Las <br />Positas Boulevard and Pecan Court, Zoning for the property is PUD <br />(Planned Unit Development)-High Density Residential District. <br />Mr. Harris presented the staff report recommending approval of the <br />two tentative maps for Chang Su-O Lin stating they both conform <br />to the approved planned unit development zoning and development plan <br />approval, <br />The public hearing was opened, <br />Ted C. Fairfield, Consulting Civil Engineer, represented Chang Su-O <br />Lin. He stated that the tentative maps are in full conformance with <br />the approved planned unit development and that the tentative maps <br />are somewhat of an administrative approval, Mr. Fairfield indicated <br />that the two conditions proposed to be changed by Mr. Warnick are <br />a result of applicant-City negotiations and he concurs with the <br />proposed changes as submitted. He stated that with regard to <br />Item 8b they don't object to building a road through the neighbor- <br />hood but doesn' see any way to get the right-of-way if the developer <br />doesn't wish to dedicate it. He said they may ask the City to <br />assist in this matter. He stated they agree with all of the con- <br />ditions of the staff report. <br />-10- <br />