PC 12/12/79 - Laserfiche WebLink

Judd Hull, Geologist, 1441 Greenwood, spoke stating he had requested some stripping so that his crew could get an overview of the property. He stated they have made some pits, examined soil to 6 ft. so they could see what types of materials and debris are on the pro- perty. He stated any project must be approached with caution and that he doesn't know the depths of the pits filled and that he will take a look at the clay expansion, debris depths, etc. Fie stated this was discussed with the people who prepared the draft EIR as they called him as a consultant. Fie stated he would be happy to answer any questions relating to the project. Commissioner Geppert then addressed fine materials. Mr. Hull re- sponded. He stated they would address the percolation of materials. He stated there was a lot of man-dumped debris which is in the pro- cess of being removed and this must all be removed so that equipment can get in there. Commissioner Geppert addressed many other questions to Mr. Hull, all of which were answered. Commissioner Jamieson asked about the sewage availability. Mr. Caroline responded it was his understanding that sewage is available on a first-come, first-served basis relating to industrial property. Commissioner Geppert asked if the business park would take one-third of the remaining capacity. Dale Junta, attorney from Palo Alto, spoke stating he represented potential purchasers of the lots within the park. He stated he agrees with the conditions of the staff report except with #9 on page 10; that the second part of #9 is unreasonable and didn't understand why Valley Avenue to Santa Rita Road couldn't be used. Commissioner Geppert then asked Mr. Harris about condition #9 where it speaks to traffic generated --, he suggested it should be 'truck' track traffic generated--. Mr. Harris agreed, the condition should relate to truck traffic. Bob Graham, 503 San Gabriel Court, spoke in favor of the business park stating it would be an asset to the community. Lars Jotten, 1265 Kolln, stated most of the neighbors were polled and agree with the concept and approach providing certain restrictions and requests can be considered; namely, the neighbors on the south who are adjacent to the south loop would prefer it be moved east; north side concerning the recreation facility the property owners feel it should be moved from the northwest to the northeast. They requested a 30 ft. planter easement across the western side of the property; they further requested that the minimum building setback be 75 ft. from the nearest existing residential lot. He further requested that the buildings be no higher than 14 ft. adjacent to the residential -7- . .... .. ... ...... __.... _.._... .., ....... _............,.... _... ..._ ..._«.. ~....... _.....__... ... .......... ... ..~...... ... .... . .. .... .... ... .~.. ......r_..... ..~