Laserfiche WebLink
<br />MINUTES NO. 89-22 <br /> <br />Page 6_ of 7 <br /> <br />November 9, 1989 <br /> <br />in mind on how much property should be dedicated to open space. <br /> <br />Patton: Applicant's engineer illustrated the preferred location for Unit 9. <br />Without a floor plan, it is hard to be more specific. The house would be <br />similar in size to the one next door. <br /> <br />OluQosh: If the residence was developed toward the front of the lot with a 12- <br />foot easement for fire vehicles, they would have to go up Howell and Midland to <br />get back to the area. <br /> <br />Patton: An easier way would be to access the property from Vista Grande through <br />an East Bay Municipal Utility District easement. <br /> <br />DluQosh: So there would be more than one access to the parcel. <br /> <br />Vitz: Access would require EBMUO permission, but I assume it could be obtained <br />if it were not detrimental. <br /> <br />Reed: Stated he agreed with the developer that single ownership of that parcel <br />would be easier for maintenance rather than common ownership. <br /> <br />Hesseltine: Asked Staff if there were similar situation in Bay 0 Vista. <br /> <br />Vitz: There have been several, and there have been no major problems other than <br />weeds creating a fire hazard. <br /> <br />Oluaosh: Asked the City Attorney to comment on the ability of the City to place <br />wording in the CC & R and the deeds of trust so that when the land transferred <br />to new owners they would be aware of the conditions attached. <br /> <br />Ri back: The very nature of CC & R's are to make purchasers aware of the <br />conditions on the property. They would show up in the title report. <br /> <br />Ness: Stated he agreed that Lot 9 should be single ownership. <br /> <br />Reed: Stated a condition should be added that all roads be kept clean. <br /> <br />Hesseltine: It appears that the homeowners in the area recognize the site will <br />be developed and the only issues are that the development be done in such a way <br />as to not negatively impact the existing homes. The project makes a lot of sense <br />given the current unkept state of the property. Believe the placement of the <br />house on Lot 9 is an engineering issue. Single ownership of Lot 9 would be <br />preferable to joint ownership. <br /> <br />M (Pretto) to recommend approval of Tract 6307 subject to amending the Conditions <br />to approve Lot 9 as submitted and a condition be added that developer will clean <br />up any dirt from construction promptly. Ask that the City Engineer be <br />conservative regarding soil issues. Do not want this recommendation to be <br />construed as approval of any unanswered questions. S (Dlugosh) C unanimously. <br /> <br />Riback: At any point during the development process the City Engineer determines <br />