Laserfiche WebLink
interim? He felt Council should place an interim underlying designation on the Vineyard <br />Corridor until completion of the studies. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr felt if it takes extra time to come to the right conclusion, she was willing to <br />take that time. If an areas has been designated a study area, there are no zoning issues to deal <br />with anyway, so underlying zoning would not be relevant. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver asked for staff to comment on what happens when property is in a study area <br />and an application for development is submitted. Is the City obligated to process the <br />application? <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift indicated Council had adopted interim policies with respect to zoning for that <br />area and it is essentially one unit per existing lot of record. Septic tanks and use of wells are <br />allowed for now, but no subdivisions are allowed until such time as the overall General Plan <br />issues are resolved. If the luly 1 recommendation is adopted, a Specific Plan will be required <br />before any development will take place. Currently, a property owner can build one unit for each <br />existing lot of record per the zoning designation. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr indicated almost all those parcels have one house already. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift stated staff is currently reviewing one house for a vacant lot in the area. <br /> <br /> Mr. Rasmussen added if staff can conclude that the recommendation as to the Vineyard <br />Avenue Corridor at the bottom of page 5 of Attachment 1 is to be deleted. <br /> <br /> Council concurred. <br /> <br />Foothill ROad Area <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti indicated she was trying to fred some common ground for all these <br />properties on Foothill Road. The Planning Commission selected only certain ones to consider <br />changes on. The only property that actively requested a change was the Kuld property. Can <br />Council say nothing will be developed above the 670 foot elevation, or beyond the permanent <br />urban boundary line, and whatever is developed on the lower acreage would depend on the <br />gcotechnical findings. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis stated hillside development has been occurring and CEQA laws have changed <br />regarding required studies prior to development. If staff is supporting Rural Density, it probably <br />has a pretty good idea of what is required for this property. The property owners originally <br />received expectations of a certain number units when development standards were much different <br />than they are now. She did not want to see a plan for 21 units in this area and she did not want <br />to give the owners an expectation of that many units. <br /> <br />07/02/96 -23- <br /> <br /> <br />