PC 101007 - Laserfiche WebLink

The proposed modification was accepted by Commissioners Blank and Olson. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Blank, Fox, Narum, Olson, and Pearce. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. RECUSED: None. ABSENT: None. The motion passed. 6.PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS Chairperson Fox noted that she was feeling ill and would not be able to continue to attend the meeting. She added that Vice Chair Blank would preside over the remainder of the meeting. Chairperson Fox left the dais and the meeting at this point. a. PUD-87-19-03M, Brad Hirst/William and Lydia Yee Work session to review and receive comments on an application for a major modification to an existing Planned Unit Development (PUD) for six custom lots ranging from 3.22 acres to 10.65 acres with the eastern 8.5-acre portion of Lot 4 being proposed for vineyards. The property is located at 4100 Foothill Road and is zoned PUD-LDR/RDR/OS (Planned Unit Development – Low Density Residential/Rural Density Residential/Open Space) District. Ms. Decker summarized the staff report and presented the background, scope and layout of this matter. She noted that a fault time ran at the portion of the area, creating a condition where no lots would be buildable there. She added that it was atypical for a PUD plan to not have a sunset or expiration date after two years. In this case, it was not required to expire, and the PUD was active and vested in terms of the development plan. The lotting pattern referred to as the additional 14 lots can no longer have a phased final map if this or any other approval could not be supported by the Planning Commission or City Council. She added that because conditions along Foothill Road have changed since 1987, Foothill Road has more development and increased traffic. Staff requested direction from the Commission with respect to a new entry configuration into the subdivision. Staff has shown a location directly opposite Muirwood Drive and the reconfiguration of a portion of Foothill Road. She then identified the site constraints. The City’s general direction regarding larger lot developments has been to allow for a defined development area, as shown by defined by the dashed lines on the site plan. Recent developments that have come forward have shown cluster developments with dedicated open space around them. The applicant proposed dividing the bulk of the site into large three- to ten- acre sites. Staff was concerned whether those large lots would be sufficiently maintained and landscaped, particularly with the steeper slopes. Staff supported examining whether a smaller lot size could be implemented, with more of a cluster development of one-half- to one-acre lots with more open space held privately or dedicated open space. Staff would like the applicant to PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, October 10, 2007 Page 8 of 21