06/13/1989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

C. LANDS OF QUARRY HILLS: (continued) : 41, The report also noted that the proposed subdivision tentative map was in the final days of a ninety day extension on the one year tentative map timeline. The Director of Public Works further noted the option of continuance as the applicant has submitted a letter dated 6/13/89 requesting an extension of 90 days on the application. As a possible timeframe for Town review of the project, Mr. Ekern noted the following dates: 6/26/89 staff review (geologists reports) ; 7/12/89 Planning Commission (if geologists concur on their findings) ; and 8/2/89 City Council . The City Attorney stated that the Council had two options: 1) deny the application or 2) concur with the applicant ' s request for a ninety day continuance. Siegel brought up two areas of concern: 1) He assumed the Town did not want to be a part of the litigation between Los Altos and the County regarding the environmental impact report. He would prefer to know the outcome of the hearing on this issue (mid-August) before seeing the map again on the project as it could take months if the court did require an EIR. 2) The applicant had a hearing scheduled before the State concerning his water rights. Siegel believed it was very important to this project to know where the water was going to come from. In conclusion, Siegel stated that he thought there should be consensus between the geologists as their report affected the design of the project. John Vidovich, applicant, noted that he had submitted a letter requesting continuance. He further noted that the Council could delay their decisions until after the hearing on the lawsuit. Council discussed the applicant ' s request for continuance. It was noted by Tryon that the letter in part stated: . . . 'This request is applicable only to lots which are outside Measure B, namely the 19 lots which are contained in the lower quarry. The balance of the application is hereby requested to be withdrawn. ' Tryon stated that she could not support the request as stated as it sepaLated--thn was imprecise' oat. Johnson commented that the decision before Council was to deny or continue the project and he believed the details could be worked out at a later time. Siegel also commented on the General Plan and zoning text amendments and was advised by the City Attorney that public hearings could be scheduled on these issues . *(ATMIDED BY COUNCIL 6/21/89', MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Casey and passed unanimously by all members present to state Council' s concurrence with the request from Mr. Vidovich for a ninety day extension from June 13 , 1989 for consideration of the tentative map for Lands of Quarry Hills (the entire application) . Lw -2- 6/13/89