Laserfiche WebLink
Discussion then ensued between Chairperson Getty, Commissioner Wilson <br />and Mr. Goldsworthy regarding Fire Department access to the project, <br />easements for the storm drain and a hamr~lerhead cul-de-sac. Commissioner <br />Doherty stated that for legal purposes all accessways would have to be <br />closed for a 24-hour period once a year. <br />Dave McLelland, Vermillion, addressed the density situation. He said <br />they are providing sufficient room for the homeowners to put in hot <br />tubs, decks, etc. He also addressed energy efficiency. <br />Mr. McLelland showed the Commission pictures of a similar development in <br />Pleasant Hill. <br />Marv Smith, 1818 Halcyon Court, spoke representing the Church. He <br />stated he agreed an easement would be available and that the Church is <br />pleased with the proposed plans and that 21 units are within reason <br />and supports the application. <br />The public hearing was closed. <br />Commissioners Jamieson, Doherty and Lindsey discussed the proposed <br />cul-de-sac and suggested a hammerhead configuration. A motion was <br />made by Commissioner Lindsey, seconded by Commissioner Wilson that <br />the mitigated negative declaration for case PUD-81-18 be recommended <br />for approval because conditions imposed on project approval would <br />reduce any significant adverse environmental effects to insignificant. <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br />Ayes: <br />Noes: <br />Commissioners Doherty, <br />Chairperson Getty <br />None <br />Jamieson, Lindsey, Wilson and <br />Resolution No. 2052 was then entered and adopted recommending approval <br />of the mitigated negative declaration for Vermillion Development <br />Company as motioned. <br />Commissioner Lindsey then made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Wilson <br />that case PUD-81-18 be recommended for approval subject to the conditions <br />shown in the staff report; adding condition #32 "That the cul-de-sac and <br />curve in the private street shall be modified as shown on the revised <br />site plan dated 8/7/81," and finds that the proposal is in the best <br />interest of the public health, safety and welfare; meets the purposes <br />of the PUD Ordinance; and complies with all applicable goals and <br />policy statements of the General Plan. <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br />Ayes: Commissioners Doherty, Jamieson, Lindsey, Wilson and <br />Chairperson Getty <br />Noes: None <br />Resolution No. 2053 was then entered and adopted recommending approval <br />of case PUD-81-18 as motioned. <br />-16- <br /> <br />