Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner Wilson raised the point that the area should be rural <br />with large sized lots. He mentioned the front yard setback in <br />condition 2-h and Mr. Harris said it should read "Not more than <br />two homes in a row may have the same front yard setback. <br />Commissioner Wilson asked for information pertaining to the flood <br />zone and was there excessive fill or downstream problems. <br />Mr. Harris stated there is a map showing problems and it is a very <br />minor part of the eastern part of the property. Basically it is <br />the park area. <br />Mr. Wilson expressed concern that the City should accept a park <br />with such problems. He felt it would set a precedent for other <br />developers. <br />Commissioner Wilson next addressed the alignment with the 1972 plan <br />for Foothill Road and Mr. Warnick responded that it was pretty close. <br />Mr. Robert Lawrence, planning consultant for the project addressed <br />some of the Commissioner's questions. He said the geologic report <br />had been done in January 1981 and included a map indicating the <br />Calaveras fault was not on the property. <br />Commissioner Wilson asked if the grading plan had been submitted <br />and Mr. Lawrence indicated that they plan to do minimal grading <br />on the north and west side to retain the natural land configura- <br />tion. Detailed grading plans would not be appropriate at this <br />time and when more detailed guidelines were provided by the City <br />then they would provide detailed plans. <br />The Commissioners expressed dismay over some of the extreme grading <br />done on some developments in the area, such as the Blackwell project <br />and the Centex project. <br />Mr. Lawrence passed out a letter to the Commission regarding the <br />dedication of the park land. <br />There was then discussion regarding Foothill Road and what the <br />future plans for its development are. Mr. Lawrence felt that the <br />City's estimates of its future use were excessive and objected to <br />the requirement of a bond. <br />Mr. Lawrence had the following requests for changes to the staff's <br />recommendations: <br />1. Because of their reduction of the proposed lots to 81, he <br />feels that the loss of one more lot is not necessary and <br />wants to retain 81 lots in the development, and asked to <br />delete condition no. 1. <br />-4- <br />...._ .. ......__.. _. _. _... .._.... ... ...... ... ... T.~......_ ,... .... _.._..._ .... .. .. ~..... _.. ..... .. ... ~,.... <br />