CCMIN092193 - Laserfiche WebLink

38 Mr. Higdon indicated the final map is due to be filed, but couM not verify if it had been. He pointed out the Presley water tank is the only feasible solution for the area. If it is not built, then staff would have to reconsider a water tank for the entire area. Mr. Swift pointed out that if the Presley project is not built, the Moller project will not have a water source. The developer would then have to come back to Council with a PUD modification. Council has the option of approving the project with no condition for a water tank, or conceptually approve a tank and address the size at a later time. Peter MacDonald, 400 Main Street, attorney for the Moller Family and Boulevard Development, briefly reviewed the discussion from the last Council meeting. He indicated they had reached an agreement with the neighbors on a private easement for access to the Glenn and Joel properties and supported the broadly worded condition regarding the water tank. He was surprised about the newly raised issue of open space maintenance costs. He believed ~e $40,000 figure was way too high. An environmental expert indicated the cost for five years was $25,000. Mr. MacDonald indicated a strong preference for private open space except for public access to the trails. There would be conservation easements to permanently protect the open space. If necessary, a landscape and lighting district could be formed to pay for maintenance. With regard to discussion regarding a public road, the property owners and developer were Hamid Taeb, Boulevard Developers, reiterated some of Mr. MacDonald's comments. He then referred to the condition to underground the utilities. He believed that because the developer had invested in the special habitat and open space maintenance, it should receive some relief from that condition. Also because there was no firm price for the cost of the undergrounding, he preferred to do the construction rather than deposit money into a fund. He felt keeping the poles above ground added to the rural atmosphere of the area. Mr. Taeb then referred to the proposed gate in the B Court area. He referred to the map and cited problems in the area which support the need for the gate in the proposed location. Jocelyn Combs, East Bay Regional Park District, 4443 Second Street, indicated that when this project first came forward, the Park District did not have the ownership of property that it curren~y does. She also stated this project goes beyond all expectations for trails and habitat. She cautioned Council to make sure adequate easements were available for future Wails up to the ridge as well as parking for staging areas. Ann Sorenson Rains, 4432 Foothill Road, referred to the condition regarding the spring boxes and stated she has an agreement from the developer. David Glenn, 5650 Foothill Road, indicated he had reached agreement with the developer regarding the easement. He also urged Council to approve the gate on B Court. 09/21/93 8