CCMIN062188 - Laserfiche WebLink

467 lanes plus turn lane in residential area and two lanes in the vicinity of the park; the two land units are split by the arroyo - 114 developable acres with 206 units $ 1.8 units/acre in Land Unit A, and 123 lots $ 5.6 units/acre in Land Unit B; Adobe Park consisting of 4 acres; public trail dedication; Foot- hill Road dedication far pedestrian and bike pathway; private recreation area; community greenspace; child access from site to Foothill Knolls with hard sur- face emergency access; access to Foothill High School; and neighborhood park. He stated that many hours had been spent in the development process, and he felt it is a good plan. Mr. Bob Silva, Vice President of Oliver de Silva, co-partners on the proj- · ect, stated that his firm recently assumed leadership for the planning process of this parcel of land. He stated the plan is a good step but it is not com- plete; a detailed plan will be presented at the PUD process. He stated he concurs with most of the revisions to the specific plan, however he would like to have the specific type of housing for Land Unit B to be determined at the time of the PUD process. He advised he is neutral on the alignment of Foot- hill Road, and access from Foothill Knolls to the proposed development. He stated that with regard to the phasing of the residential units according to school capacity, with the passage of Measure A he feels this issue will be taken care of and with the growth management process the Council will have adequate and proper control of the development. He requested the condition to C maintain the existing language regarding the phasing of construction of ClD residential units according to the availability of adequate school capacity be {v} deleted as well as the designation of Land Unit B for use as attached town- ~ houses. He stated he expects to meet with the surrounding neighbors regarding .el[ the project as it progresses. c:{[ Mr. Phillip Marshall, 7812 Foothill Knolls Drive, representing the Foot- hill Knolls Homeowners Association, presented a letter to Council dated June 17, 1988, setting forth their concerns regarding the proposed plan. He stated they are greatly concerned over the safety issues related to the new develop- ment; the effect of increased traffic will intensify an already busy Foothill Road. Their specific concern relates to the connection between the two developments by means of a roadway fronting the development park; Foothill · Knolls was constructed with steep and narrow roadways and minimal sidewalks and for this reason the two developments should only be connected by a foot- path to the park with a hardened accessway to provide for emergency vehicle access. He also expressed concern relative to the ambiance of the area west of 680; most of the homeowners located at the foot of Plesanton Ridge to enjoy the rural charm of the area and he did not want the character of this area destroyed. Mr. Marshall stated the Homeowners group are opposed to the new configuration for the widening and realignment of Foothill Road because the new wider road is likely to create a speed zone, it will cut off Adobe Park from the development, and make the park a small, dark and remote space which will invite vandalism, unsavory activities, and an increased danger of fire on the ridge. He stated the TMI project would provide many excellent facilities to the area, such as developed city park, walkway/bike trail along the west side of Foothill Road, a second five acre parcel to house the historic Adobe, and greenbelt access to give ridgelands wildlife access to the arroyo. He requested Council to consider these issues carefully so that the final plan is one that will please all parties and still preserve the natural beauty of this Mr. Silva stated that most of the above concerns can be addressed at the time of the PUD process, however, he is willing to meet with the homeowners 7 - 6-21-88