PC 022708 - Laserfiche WebLink

of grading that had been required. He noted that the site had been fine without the grading but that they had no choice in the grading; he believed their lots were sufficient in their original, non-graded state. He noted, however, that they were several hundred thousand dollars into the project and that their expenditures would be dramatically increased and incur additional process and time delay if they were to change the lots. He added that they had worked on this prof ect for 20 years and that a change in the lots would put them back to the beginning of the process. Steve Brosozky noted that he had submitted a detailed letter to the Commission. He added that he had been incorrect with respect to the sports courts, which was no longer an issue. He noted that this prof ect had changed significantly since 2001 and that the original Planning Commission that heard this application did not approve it because it could not make the findings. The Commission requested the City Council to look at it, and this project may have been the way to get the Neal School built. He stated that ultimately had nothing to do with this prof ect. He believed that if the custom home plan had been submitted as a separate application, it would not be approved. He did not believe the Commission would want to produce custom lots with one flat pad, without stepped grading or driveways going up hills, as was the case west of the City. He noted that it did not meet the guidelines of the Vineyard Avenue Corridor Specific Plan, which state that "the house designs must be adjusted to conform to the natural character of the site, and grading for a building's driveways should be compatible with the existing topography and minimized to preserve the natural topology of the site." He expressed concern about the issues surrounding moving 148,000 cubic yards of dirt, which would require 25,000 truck trips. He believed the project could be built differently with less grading and that single-story homes could be built on the second tier. He believed that building custom homes would be a much longer process. He believed the option from staff was a step backwards, and he was concerned that he would shoulder the responsibility for getting the bids. He noted that the plan fees would be revoked if they did not act on the project within five years. He believed that Option 2 placed the development in a very inconvenient spot in relation to his household and that he would have to cross and bury his electrical lines. He expressed concern that he was allowed only three parcels on his property while the Chrismans were allowed to have 12 parcels; two of the Chrismans' parcels had already been sold. He added that one of his three parcels could not be buildable because the easements went around the proposed site. He would also have to pay the Specific Plan fees for the third parcel that he could not develop. He noted that a fourth option was available to the Commission, which was to find that the use of the well water was not required for irrigation purposes, to recommend the revision to the conditions, and eliminate the right of the Chrismans to use the well on the Brosozky property when City water service was available to the Chrisman property. He would like the fourth option to be acted upon. He believed that if this issue was not resolved, he would appeal the proposed homes and would revisit these issues with the Planning Commission. He noted that the Berlogars drilled a well on the other side of the Chrismans, which yielded water with no problem; they relinquished their rights to the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 27, 2008 Page 7 of 26