Laserfiche WebLink
the current consensus in that since there is really no conclusive evidence about the fault, there should be <br />no concerns. He also noted that homes aze currently being build on the Hayward Fault. <br />Mr. Howell reported that there is a storm drainage problem at the corner of Alisal Street and Faith <br />Chapel that has not been addressed in the specific plan. He feels it could affect the path and should be <br />studied. He asked that Mr. Higdon and Mr. Rasmussen make themselves available to discuss the issue <br />with him further. In addition, he has some photographs showing the flood problem in the area and <br />agreed to make color copies for staff. <br />With regazd to the Spotorno flat land, Mr. Howell feels that only those property owners on the Spotorno <br />property would benefit from the view corridor. He stated that the density bonus given to the Spotomos <br />may be worth it in exchange for their constructing the bypass road. <br />Mr. Rasmussen stated that several people have asked for a graphic illustration of the proposed view <br />corridor. He drew an illustration depicting a view corridor alternative. Following this, Mr. Howell <br />stated that he feels the view corridor is not really for the public, but rather for just a few homes. <br />Mr. Rasmussen further explained that the density bonus was proposed in recognition of the Spotorno <br />agriculture/open space easement which is a significant contribution in addition to the numerous trails <br />going through the Spotorno property. He also reminded the Commission of the Spotomos' obligation to <br />construct a portion of the bypass road. Considering those factors, staff feels that the density bonus can <br />be easily justified. <br />Roger Smith, 6344 Alisal Street, restated his comments from last week's meeting that the density agreed <br />upon in the General Plan is a compromise. He feels it would be unfair to start renegotiations of the <br />density at this time. In addition, he feels that by allowing one-acre lots, there would be no way to claim <br />that the specific plan maintains the semi-rural chazacter of the valley, which is one of the major goals. <br />With regard to the Spotomos' suggestion of moving the urban growth boundary line a few hundred feet, <br />he disagrees that any homes in that area would be out of view of the valley floor and, in contrast, would <br />be highly visible. He suggested that rather than changing the density as identified in the General Plan, <br />that the Commission ask the Spotornos to submit a design plan, then hold public hearings on the issue <br />before making a recommendation. He also disagreed with the contention that there were any meetings <br />where citizens voted in favor of 1-acre lots over 2-acre lots. <br />Mr. Smith further stated that instead of the existing owners having to share the cost of the bypass road, <br />they should just give the developer access from Alisal Street to accommodate the 16 homes in the flat <br />area instead of adding six more housing units to help pay for the cost of the new bypass road. He feels <br />that it would be unfair to change the intent of the General Plan at this time by building into the specific <br />plan a bonus of six additional housing units. <br />Mr. Smith also reported for the record that he obtained a copy of the CAD file from the City and ran the <br />program on his computer. He found that it showed 31 or 32 acres on the Spotorno flat land area. The <br />Planning Commission Page 6 Apri129, 1998 <br />