PC 070908 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Narum inquired if the two properties bordered the Ponderosa property, and Mr. Dolan replied that the planning area borders the Ponderosa property but that there was no developable site bordering the property. Chair Blank stated that he liked the idea of having sidewalks on both sides of all the streets within the project. Commissioner Fox agreed. Commissioner Narum stated that she would prefer to add a condition to allow for flexibility for Ponderosa to work with the Traffic Engineer as to what would make sense, with the direction that more sidewalks are preferred. Commissioner Fox agreed and suggested that the sidewalks would be put in and approved at the tentative map stage. Commissioner O'Connor made an assumption that putting sidewalks on both sides and narrowing the street down by four feet would allow for parking on one side of the street versus two sides. Mr. Tassano stated that staff would prefer a road width of 36 feet with sidewalks with 20 feet for the actual road. He noted that there are some streets in the City where staff has approved 32 feet and has allowed for parking on both sides but with very narrow streets. He recommended, however, that the streets be 36 feet. Commissioner O'Connor noted that the area near Kamp Drive and Equestrian Drive have narrower streets and allowed parking on both sides, but only one car can pass at a time; however, this slows vehicles down. Commissioner Narum noted that she believed this development has a 20- or 25-foot setback from the street, which leaves room in the driveway to park a car. Commissioner O'Connor stated that he believed the setback to the house is 12 feet, and adding afour-foot sidewalk would leave only eight feet from the sidewalk to the house. Chair Blank referred to the developer's proposed modification to Condition 69 regarding the media filtration system. Ms. Decker stated that in listening to the applicant's comments, staff is proposing a couple of modifications to the Conditions of Approval for consideration by the Commission. She indicated that the first one would be Condition No. 18. c. regarding retaining walls, which is specifically required to be part of the development plan but which staff believes could be taken out and made a separate condition with the addition of the language "for review and approval at the Tentative Map stage," as it is really a part of the grading and drainage plans, and there may be other considerations by the time the fine grading is completed. Ms. Decker noted that the second condition related to street widths, Condition No. 67 under Engineering requirements, where staff could add a new Condition, No. 67.g. as follows: "The applicant shall work with staff to design the street section to provide sidewalks on both sides of the street by reducing the street width, subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Director of Planning and Community Development at the Tentative Map approval stage." PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 9, 2008 Page 24 of 39