05/28/69 - Laserfiche WebLink

~. The development is being entirely pre-planned and the Commissioners will receive detailed plane on all the models proposed for each Lot. It is anticipated that Plan #1 will not occur more than twice in each block area. Mr. Bostedt stated that once a model is set for a lot, it will not be changed. He stressed that the architect would abide by the decision of the Commission, but he did remind the Commission that thin development was under the P.U.D. There was a certain amount of discussion concerning this requested reduction in the front yard. Commissioners Antonini and Gibbs, along with the Chairman did not feel the Commission should deviate from rules that were net down. Commissioner Carrigan, however, expressed that he did not like to nee a backyard that was nnly 12 ft. wide, which might be the case Lf the front yard could not be reduced. The Secretary was instructed to advise the architect of the decision of the Co®isaion that he could not go ahead with Plan #1 as set forth, but that he would have to keep the frontyard ae defined in the Zoning Ordinance. c. The Planning Director advised the Commission that a letter from the League of California Cities had been received announcing an annual conference for Commissioners and members of the Planning Departments to be held from April 8, 1970 to April 10, 1970. Dore detailed information would be forthcoming later in the year. 9. TBNTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAPS. a. Approval of Tentative Tract Map #2855, Costanzo-Nilson, as per final zoning as recommended by City Council. Dnder State law, it is necessary that when City Council modifies a zone change as approved by the Planning Commission, that the zoning as it relates to the map be returned to the latter board for reapproval of the map favored by Council. For that reason, Tentative Tract Map #2855 was again before the Commissioners. Thus it was necessary to approve Exhibit A instead of Exhibit B which was originally approved by the Commission. This change in approval would extend to Tentative Tract Map #2855, Costanzo-Nilson and also the rezoning application under EZ-68-8. Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbs, seconded by Commissioner Carrigan, and carried, the following resolution was offered: RBSOLUTION N0. 908 NBERFAS, the application of MacKay & Sompa in behalf of Costanzo-Nilson for reapproval of Tentative Tract Map #2855, has been referred back to the Gammiasion to coincide with the decision of the City Council for approval of Exhibit A. NOW, TBEREFORH BB IT RESOLVED, that reapproval of said tentative map be given to Exhibit A, subject to the follow- ing conditions: 1. That the property line radius of the corners at the intersection of Avenue G sad Santa Rita Road be increased to 40 ft. 2. That access to Lot #1 be denied from the Santa Bits frontage and from the first 50 ft., measured from the curb return of the Avenue G frontage. 3. That access to Lot #2 be denied from the first 100 ft., measured from the curb return on Santa Rita Road and the first 50 ft. on Avenue G. 4. That street names that have been set by existing or proposed streets on adjacent developments or otherwise firmly established, be continued in this tract and that the developer submit a list of proposed street names for the remaining streets for approval by the Planning Director prior to submittal of a final map. -6-