7.1 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT December 10, 1997 Page 7 this was not technically possible. He further discussed other options previously discussed with the Town. He would like to make sure before this subdivision is approved that the entire drainage system is approved, and not misleading people into signing easements. He does not feel the drainage situation is 100%resolved. He further voiced concern with any two story structures in the La Paloma corridor. Jeff Lea, project engineer, addressed safety issues regarding the driveway as he did not see any safety benefit by moving the driveway over to the other side of the property. Tom Puorro, 26296 Fremont Road, again voiced his preference for the placement on the other side of the property. The Planning Director commented there would have to be some type of road for channel maintenance. Staff or the project engineer do not feel that the amount of water that would collect on this road creates a safety problem with people getting in and out of these lots. They do understand a road coming in so close to the creek may be more inviting to children then having the road go around the redwoods, then paralleling the creek. This is not the kind of location were you will have five feet of water over the roadway. If there is water here, it is only a few inches of water covering a broad flat area. The Chairman suggested a low fence to offer some protection. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Schreiner asked for more clarification regarding the drainage system which was reviewed by the assistant engineer. Commissioner Schreiner further discussed setbacks and the placement of homes. Fremont Road is considered a scenic road, stating the following: a larger setback from Fremont Road (55-60 foot setback); height restrictions; proposed two feet of fill in the central area on the property; the impact on raising the pad and height of future homes; and impact on the area(La Paloma basin and Fremont Road). Another issue is if the access easement is revised, it would decrease the development area on lot 1 which would require a lot line adjustment to adjust the numbers. It was noted that there is not a map of the La Paloma corridor. Commissioner Cheng felt there was no reason for two driveways on the property. She did like Mr. Osterlund's driveway suggestion. She also felt only Parcel A was in the La Paloma corridor. Chairman Gottlieb discussed the proposed circular driveway in a school area asking for only one driveway for the two lots, the development figures for the two lots be more equal, height restrictions for both houses, and a larger setback from the road for Parcel B (scenic road). Regarding construction, restrict all off street parking, especially during school hours. Commissioner Jinkerson supported the driveway next to the swale although he would not want this to be policy as there are unique circumstances surrounding the La Paloma basin. He made the following recommendations: only one driveway; a 60 foot setback for Parcel B; a lot line adjustment between the two parcels; no basements on either lots; maximum height of 23 feet measured from the existing grade; and the clarification that the La Paloma corridor ends at Fremont Road.