PC 05/27/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chair Cooper shazed Commissioner Sullivan's concerns with cut-through traffic to Valley Avenue from Rose Avenue and sees no pressing need to pursue that at this time. He is supportive of narrowing the street because he feels that wider streets encourage speeding, and he does not want to turn it into a major thoroughfaze. Mr. Higdon pointed out that there aze many options to consider when connecting two roads. He noted that mitigation factors, such as curved roads and other calming devices will be considered. He stated that when Rose Avenue connects to Valley Avenue, it is not intended to be acut-through route. The Commission further discussed the positive and the negative aspects of connecting Rose Avenue to Valley Avenue, with the most significant concerns being speeding cars and development of traffic congestion on that route. Commissioner Kumazan stated that if there is not a connection to Valley Avenue, it enhances the need for the 36-foot street. He does not feel that narrowing the street is an appropriate means of traffic mitigation. A motion was made by Commissioner Roberts, seconded by Commissioner Maas, recommending approval of Vesting Tentative Map 7002, subject to the Conditions in Exhibit "B." ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Maas, Roberts, and Sullivan, and Chair Cooper NOES: Commissioner Kumaran ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Resolution No. PC-98-40 was entered and adopted as motioned. Commissioner Kumazan noted for the record that he opposed the motion because he felt the street should remain at 36 feet. Commissioner Sullivan stated that he would like to know what is intended for the rest of the area surrounding this application. He commented that this is one of the last pieces of semi-rural type land left inside the urban growth boundary line. He read a portion of the General Plan and feels a study or analysis should be done to determine what can be done with that open space land within the urban growth boundary, other than what is identified in the General Plan. He realizes that this would probably warrant a General Plan amendment. However, he is concerned that a road around the arroyo would have a big impact on the wildlife. He also suggested that any other agricultural areas within the urban grown boundary line be analyzed before it is assumed it will be built out as residential. Commissioner Roberts agreed and stated that the area is being planned and developed in small bits, with no specific plan for the area. She agrees that a study should be done before developers plan for the azea. Mr. Higdon noted that only a very small azea that is lefr is private property and the remainder of that area is owned by the Fairgrounds. A brief discussion following regarding whether a General Plan amendment would be necessary in order for the Commission to condition that land for a certain use or whether a specific plan would be required. Mr. Iserson stated that from this point on, he suspects only one more development to be incorporated Planning Commission Minutes Page 13 May 27, 1998