Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Brozosky stated that grading 40 feet on top of a hill does not fit the character of the area. He <br />noted that there was no mention about the cubic yards of dirt that would be quite significant that <br />would go down to the Low Density Residential portion of the property. He inquired if there were <br />any photomontages of what that will look like after it was re-graded with fill; Mr. Otto replied <br />that the photomontage was of the proposed home. Mr. Brozosky noted that this would be one of <br />the more visible sites whose appearance would be changed with the significant amount of fill. He <br />added that he did not know how many retaining walls were proposed, where they would be <br />located, and how high they would be. <br />Mr. Brozosky noted that building a 15,000-square-foot home did not meet the intent of green <br />building standards. He did not agree with getting points for putting designing the structure to <br />support future photovoltaic (PV) panels as he did not believe that the applicants would place <br />PV panels on their roof. He noted that vineyards are allowed only for Semi-Rural Residential <br />District and not for Low Density Residential District, the designation of the lower portion of the <br />property. He expressed concern about the water for the vineyards, which technically do not <br />belong in that area. He noted that if the vineyards are proposed as landscaping to make the site <br />look better, they should be required to be put in. He noted that the fill and the benches would be <br />put there but without the vineyards, and recommended that the vineyards be conditioned to go in <br />when the house is being built to mitigate the visual impacts. <br />Mr. Brozosky noted that the Draft EIR states that the proposed vineyard in the Vineyard District <br />will be irrigated with ground water supplied by onsite wells and that City water would be used <br />for all other irrigation needs. He noted that the vineyards would be best irrigated with City water <br />because of the problems with the salt content and total dissolved solids (TDS) in the well water. <br />The use of City water would improve the water quality on-site and below. He disagreed with the <br />staff report, which stated that there was no water capacity for using City water for the vineyards. <br />The vineyards will be located in the Low Density Residential area that could hold six houses. <br />Vineyards will use less water than houses, and when they remove the vineyards to put in the <br />houses, the landscape plan will use significantly snore water. <br />With respect to the shared well, the applicants indicated that the Roberts would have the priority <br />to use it for domestic use. He noted that this would be taking away the Roberts' right to use the <br />water for irrigation. He added that irrigation is not just for aesthetic reasons. He noted the high <br />fire danger on the hillsides, which would be increased when more houses are built in that <br />location, and indicated that a greenbelt around the house added to the fire safety. He stated that <br />the Roberts should be allowed to water the yard for fire safety reasons. He proposed a condition <br />requiring the Sariches to agree to not use the well until the Roberts subdivide the property and <br />are required to receive City water. At that time, the Roberts would release all claims to the well <br />aild related easements. If the Sariches have City water, they can actually deplete the well water, <br />and the Roberts will be out of water. He noted that if the Sariches can get building materials <br />from Europe, they should be able to put in another well for $15,000 and be good neighbors. <br />Mr. Brozosky would like to see a condition requiring septic tanks to be removed at subdivision, <br />which was a requirement in the Specific Plan. Mr. Otto confirmed that was a condition for this <br />project. <br />EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, November 14, 2007 Page 13 of 19 <br />