CCMIN102582 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Max Gramatt, resident for 20 years, stated he concurred with the Planning Commission recommendations and felt these would be good for the town. Mr. Clem Finney, representing the Diocese of Oakland, stated he was concerned about the location of the park on Catholic property. He stated it has not yet been determined whether the church would develop a parish or a high school on the site but felt it would be best if the proposed park would be moved to another location. He added that a portion of the church property has been sold to Devcon for frontage to facilitate the Rheem access. Mr. Gil Barbee, 147 Bernal Avenue, stated he disagreed with staff conclusion for a low density residential designation of the area abutting projected quarry operations; adding he felt this should be high density. He stated he felt the roads should be curved instead of straight, and that Trenery Drive should be made a cul- de-sac in front of the Molinaro property. Mr. W. E. Kovak, 3124 Weymouth Court, stated he felt streets in this area should be straight, not curved; and that he is concerned with development of the City. Mr. A1 Weimken, Trenery Drive, made a slide presentation and presented various documents reviewing what residents in the area had done in the past to preserve the area in its rural atmosphere and to protect it from unnecessary adverse impacts, i.e., gravel truck traffic and noise, etc. He stated the residents still want to retain the rural characteristic. He stated that if Trenery Drive becomes a contin- uous street from Santa Rita Road to Martin Avenue it would create an awkward situa- tion of zoning from general and limited industrial and high density residential then medium density PUD with condominiums and apartments abruptly to an area with a two- lane rural type road with estate size lots and homes. In addition, there would be potential traffic problems resulting in danger to horses and other animals in this unique rural area. He advised that if a 40 ft. wide street were constructed it would remove all the heritage trees bordering on the east side of Trenery Drive and pos- sibly some of the trees on the west side, and that a 60 ft. wide street would take 10 ft. of private property along both sides of Trenery Drive including trees, lawns, circular driveways, fences, etc. Mr. Weimken stated he felt Trenery Drive should be a cul-de-sac; and that this would not hinder the traffic flow or be a disadvantage to emergency vehicles as there is not a problem at this time. He stated it is il- logical to have a street as long as the one proposed on Trenery from Santa Rita Road to Martin Avenue. He concluded by stating that most of the residents in the area live there because they like the estate size lots and rural atmosphere, and that most residents do not plan to further develop their property. Mr. Dean Wagerman, 2333 Martin Road, representing six property owners, stated he felt the staff report is thorough. He suggested that Trenery Drive be swerved rather than be made straight. He stated that many of the trees in the area are diseased and will have to be removed very soon whether development goes forward or not. He stated the proposed development of the seven parcels of property that he represents would have estate sized lots, that it is a highly usable area with no slopes, and would have a variety of sized lots which would enhance the area. He stated he felt there ~ould be some control so that these lots could not be re-cut up in the future. Mr. Wagerman concluded by stating this is a very unique area and should be developed with extreme care. He advised that his proposed development would not commence before the next 5-10 years. Planning Commissioner Doherty asked Mr. Wagerman if he was authorized to speak for all seven property owners he represented and if they all agreed with his com- ments. Mr. Wagerman stated he is authorized to represent the other six property owners and that they generally agree with his comments. 2. 10/25/82