PC 07/26/79 - Laserfiche WebLink

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 26, 1979 (continued) Mrs. Jessie Rebiejo, 6523 Amber Lane, stated she lived at the end of Amber Lane and expressed concern regarding the width of the road and how it would accommodate increased traffic. Mr. Fairfield advised that the street that is being proposed within the project will be made as wide as the City requires to accommodate traffic. He also stated they would work with the affected residents in the area regarding this matter. Mrs. Shirley Selts, 387 Sycamore Road, expressed concern regarding increased traffic and loss of rural atmosphere. She cited a fatal pedestrian accident at Sunol and Sycamore. Jan Morrison, representing FFA Chapter and 4-H Clubs, stated the Happy Valley area was about the only area remaining that allowed for animal and agricultural activities. She stated these activities were as important to the members of these clubs as soccer, track and other activities of the City youth. She stated that with increased traffic and other impacts on the environment they would be unable to raise agriculture and keep animals as they have done in the past. She urged that this area remain rural. Mr. R. M. Edwards, 6592 Arlington Drive, stated he felt progress should be stopped at sometime and that this area should be left as open space. Mrs. Terry Emmett, 6558 Hanover Court, stated she felt the City should give consideration for parks in this area. Carol Halverson, Happy Valley Road, stated the kids in the area were used to the country atmosphere and want to keep it the way it is now; they want their freedom. Mr. Ted Fairfield rebutted the concerns of the residents in the area. He stated he felt this project was even better than Rose Pointe, that he had helped design Rose Pointe and remembered the opposition to this development at the time it was proposed. He stated the proposed project was compatible to the area and that the property owner has a right to develop his property. Mr. Schrusdorf, representing Rose Pointe homeowners, stated the residents wanted to keep Rosepointe private and leave the neighborhood as it is, and that a separate access should be provided to other developments. There being no further testimony, Chairman Doherty declared the public hearing closed on the application and the negative declaration. Commissioner Geppert asked if the juriidiction of the City included the urbanization line. Mr. Harris advised that this property is within the urbanization line and within the jurisdiction of City consideration and that sewage capacity had been set aside for this area. Commissioner Geppert stated he sympathized with those desiring to stop progress but it was not right not to allow a property owner to develop his land. He added that we all lived here because somebody developed. He stated he favored the application. Commissioner Getty stated that a lot of the problems expressed tonight will be resolved in the processing of the application further down the line and that she was in favor of the application. Commissioner Wilson stated this project will help clean up the environment with water and sewage services extended to the area. He concurred with Commissioner Getty that a lot of questions and concerns will be answered before the project is developed and that he would vote in favor of this application. -5- __. _. .. _ ____..___~ _.___...._.__. __ ___....._ ___.._._...r..-.. __ _........