HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-14-1992 Planning Commission minutes.~
- ~~
r -
CITY OF SARATOGA
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
DATE: Tuesday, January 14, 1991
PLACE: Senior Adult Day Care Center - 7:30 p.m.
19655 Allendale Ave., Saratoga, CA
TYPE: Adjourned Regular Meeting
----------------------------------------------------------------
ITEMS OF DISCUSSION
1. SD-89-009 - Wonq, Chiquita Court
Request for tentative map approval to subdivide a 26.4 acre
site into five new parcels ranging from 2.6 to 10.7 acres in
size. The subject property is located between Chiquita Way
and Chiquita Court, within the NHR zone district, and is
proposed to be accessed by a cul-de-sac off Chiquita Court.
The Planning Commission continued to review the draft
Environmental Impact Report.
This was the fourth of five anticipated adjourned meetings to
allow the Planning Commissioners and the public to review and
comment on the DEIR prepared for this subdivision. Staff is
hoping to comply with the following schedule:
January 14: Chapters 4, 5 & 6
January 28: Chapters 7, 8 & 9
WONG SUBDIVISION DEIR COMMENTS:
Interim Planning Director, Stan Eisner, noted that Commissioner
Caldwell has requested that the public review period of the DEIR be
extended beyond the 90 day limit recommended in CEQA. The
Commissioners present felt this extension was appropriate and,
under the supervision of legal counsel, extended the review period
to 2/3/92 to allow it to run concurrently with the Commission's
review.
Commissioners then provided the following comments:
Pq. 4-2 Geo., Soils and Seis. MM: If the check dam is
constructed off-site, who will be responsible for its
installation and continued maintenance? Would area residents
who benefit from the dam be required to pay into a maintenance
fund? What would the affect of the dam be on down-stream
properties?
• •
Pq. 6-4 Bridge Alt. H & WQ: This section should be more
specific regarding how erosion and water quality impacts would
be reduced.
Bio.Res.: The bridge alternative would reduce the loss of
prime oak woodland, but would not likely eliminate its loss
altogether.
AES.: Aesthetic impacts will not be reduced for the immediate
adjacent neighbor.
Pq. 6-5 Mitigated Project Alternative GS & S: Clarify the
difference between cut and fill and retaining wall work
necessary for road construction and that which would
constitute landslide repair.
AES.: Discuss visibility of bridge from off-site vantage
points.
Pq. 6-6 Alternative with Access from Chiquita Way: Why was
this alternative not analyzed as thoroughly as the other ones?
Pq. 6-7 Env. Pref. Alt.: Commissioner Bogosian disagreed that
the mitigated project alternative has shown mitigation of all
potential significant impacts.