Laserfiche WebLink
Forest Hill Drive. She stated that Foothill Road is a very <br />dangerous, narrow winding road. The traffic study dated February <br />15, 1989, does not recommend the addition of another driveway. <br />She stated the intersection of Muirwood Drive (North) and Foothill <br />Road is one of the worst on Foothill Road with limited sight <br />distances and horizontal and vertical curves She stated the · <br />precedent has been set for new development to access Foothill Road <br />by such streets as Oak Creek Drive, Puri Court, and Foothill <br />Knolls Drive; all of these intersections have limited sight <br />distance and some are unsafe due to lack of turning lanes. She <br />felt controlled access to Foothill Road is the solution; she is in <br />favor of a realistic traffic control plan and believes an access <br />to Foothill Road from this new development can be incorporated <br />into such a plan. <br /> <br /> Ms. Reinke requested Council continue this item to give the <br />neighbors a chance to meet with the developer and Planned staff to <br />arrive at an acceptable plan that will lower the density by 7-10 <br />homes, determine a location for an access to Foothill Road, and <br />meet the concerns of the neighbors about individual lots and <br />houses. She advised that in June 1988 the Council asked Mr. <br />Bridgman to meet with the neighbors and get their input so that a <br />plan could be presented that was acceptable to both parties. She <br />stated the neighbors did not hear from Mr. Bridgman until January <br />29, 1989. At that time he presented them with his proposed plan; <br />the neighbors had no input during the development of the plan. <br />She does not feel the neighbors have had adequate time to address <br />all of their concerns. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lerew, 4968 Hillcrest, presented pictures taken from his <br />kitchen and deck to show the view impact of the proposed <br />development. He felt the minimum setback of units abutting <br />Palmdale should be 23 feet rather than 17 feet. He stated he does <br />not want to remove his fence and is opposed to it being replaced <br />by another one. He expressed concern regarding density and roof <br />height. <br /> <br /> Mr. Don Carothers, 5195 Muirwood Drive, addressed his <br />experience with Mr. Bridgman; Mr. Carothers was led to believe his <br />concerns would be addressed but it turned out to be non-concern on <br />the part of Mr. Bridgman. He stated the neighbors want something <br />comparable to the surrounding area and housing that will not <br />impact their views. He presented pictures of the area and asked <br />Council not to be insensitive to the neighborhood. He stated <br />there is concern about the grading, noise, and mud impacts. <br />He stated the neighbors are not pleased with what this developer <br />is doing with Phase II and would like to have more say so in the <br />planning stage. <br /> <br /> Mr. Michael Kliment, 5142 Foothill Road, owner of the <br />property above the development, stated he moved here eight months <br />ago for the open development. He is concerned about the view and <br />loss of open surroundings. He would like lower elevations for the <br />houses in this area. He stated that with the traffic on Foothill <br /> <br /> - 20 - 3-7-89 <br /> <br /> <br />