PC 062707 - Laserfiche WebLink

not evaluate other routes because there were no other proposed routes to evaluate at that time. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner O’Connor regarding State codes and local codes, Chief Cody replied that was a complex issue because local amendments could be added to State codes to make them more applicable to the local area. The wildland requirements must apply to that area in order to build within that envelope. He noted that when that was applied to the road grades, certain sections of the road could exceed the grade because the Code was not intended to state that was the maximum grade allowable. The Code states an “average grade,” but when the Fire Department looks at the access into the development, it must evaluate whether the intent of the Code would work for the area, as opposed to following the exact letter of the law. He echoed Ms. Decker’s comments that that had been done in a number of developments around the community based on the specific needs of the property. He noted that the City had some latitude in this regard. Commissioner O’Connor wished to ensure that actions not specifically delineated in the Code did not take place simply because it had been done in the past. Ms. Decker noted that when staff met with the Grey Eagle Estates representatives, staff was presented with the same question posed by Commissioner O’Connor. They examined what would possibly be feasible, but did not request that people give up lands to provide an easement. She displayed the existing easement and the current connection. In staff’s conversations with the fire officials, the goal was to have the primary entrance at the Hearst Drive location and a secondary exit more distant from that location, rather than have a two-pronged exit. Response times from Fire Stations 1 and 4 were also noted. Ms. Decker noted that the question of why the existing Grey Eagle Estates EVA could not be abandoned for the benefit of using Benedict Court. The original plan in the DEIR had lots that curved around the spine, resulting in more development in that area. As that was pulled back and removed, people would leave using the route they used to enter. Staff had confidence that the EVA would be viable and could be constructed; other opportunities may exist, although they may not be preferred because of their closer location to the main entry. She noted that the purpose in all development projects was to separate the ingress and egress points for emergency services as far away as possible from each other. She noted there was further discussion regarding the possible use of the Berlogar access road, which had been newly improved and placed. It was not anticipated at the time of development that it become an EVA, and there were insufficient waterline sizes at that road. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Olson regarding why Red Feather Court was dismissed as an access road, Ms. Decker replied that there was an exiting EVA at Grey Eagle Court. In addition, staff did not go door-to-door to ask neighbors how they felt about a 20-foot easement across their private drive. Staff spoke with the applicant, who provided some plans, and felt that this particular alignment was not direct because of PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 27, 2007 Page 15 of 28