Laserfiche WebLink
consider providing a 28-foot road width on the private road which would provide parking along <br />one side of the road and a two-way access. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson disclosed that he met with Dr. Yee and looked at the property. He noted <br />that the road went through a private gate and swung down into Foothill Road; he inquired <br />whether it would be possible to run the road straight out to intersect with Equus Court, resulting <br />in one entry and exit from Foothill Road. Ms. Decker replied that was one of the alternatives <br />considered with the original approvals; staff would continue to look at that as a way of reducing <br />exits onto Foothill Road. She added that would be a viable alternative. <br /> <br />Commissioner O’Connor disclosed that he visited the site and met with Dr. Yee. He recalled <br />that some of the building pad areas were not very flat, and while he would like to see some <br />clustering, he did not know whether that would be possible with the existing pad configuration. <br /> <br />Ms. Decker noted that the very steep terrain may be requested to be terraced in the future that <br />might include retaining walls, landscaping, and accessory structures to be installed. She added <br />that the plans were not at that stage yet. She noted that the sites were not intended to be next to <br />each other, but the City was interested to know if the Planning Commission would rather have <br />the developable areas become the actual lots and provide a portion of the site as dedicated open <br />space. The existing road was located above the Calaveras Faultline. She noted that staff would <br />examine wildlife management plans for the site as well as Fire Department requirements. <br /> <br />Acting Chairperson Blank understood that a project this small did not require a traffic study. He <br />indicated that he was interested in studying the safety aspect of this proposal and inquired about <br />the difference between a traffic study and a traffic safety study, which did not address <br />circulation, volumes, and level of service to the same degree. Ms. Decker replied that staff was <br />finding that the issue of traffic safety was coming up more often. She noted that a traffic study <br />addressed volumes, circulation, etc., and that this project was too small to warrant a study <br />because the request is only for six lots. She noted that the same discussion had taken place with <br />the M.T.O. work session. Staff noted that the traffic patterns on Foothill Road resulting from the <br />developments were an important subject to examine and that development had increased with <br />more exits onto Foothill Road. <br /> <br />In response to an inquiry by Acting Chairperson Blank regarding the number of homes planned <br />for the Merritt property, Ms. Decker replied that the preapplication identified 85 homes with one <br />existing home. The density is 1.67, which was consistent with the City’s requirements. <br /> <br />Acting Chairperson Blank disclosed that he had traded numerous phone calls with Mr. Yee in an <br />attempt to set up a meeting, but they were unable to meet. <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. <br /> <br /> <br />Brad Hirst, applicant, displayed a detailed PowerPoint presentation describing the history, scope <br />and layout of the proposed project. He described the path of the faultline, and noted that every <br />lot was located above the faultline. He commented that he did not have a problem moving the <br />lot lines to the road and out of the faultline setback area. He noted that the Fuller-Frades were in <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, October 10, 2007 Page 9 of 21 <br /> <br /> <br />