Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, <br />" <br /> <br />6.1C <br />Page 47 <br /> <br />the adjoining terrain and relatively moderate slope. Also the impacts of roadway and <br />housing construction on these lots would not be as significant as building on the other <br />vacant lots. Most of the lots further west of the site are steeper and have more <br />vegetation. These two vacant parcels also have water and sewer utilities along their <br />street frontage, whereas the parcels west of the site do not. <br /> <br />Therefore, three factual circumstances differentiate these parcels from the other <br />vacant parcels west of the site, and could serve as a basis for allowing development <br />without preparation of an EIR and related technical studies. Three circumstances are: <br /> <br />The roadway in front of 3718 Laurel Way (APN 057-301-220) and the adjoining <br />parcel (APN-053-301-230) can be built without adding retaining walls and <br />requiring major grading as identified on improvement plans entitled, "Laurel Way <br />Improvement Unit No.2," dated 9/13/71 on file with Engineering and <br />Construction. <br /> <br />These properties have water and sewer utilities along their street frontage. <br /> <br />The impacts of roadway construction, grading, and home construction would be <br />less than those impacts on the remaining vacant and steeper parcels. <br /> <br />2. Recommended Improvements <br />Based on these facts, the above two owners of the vacant properties would be able <br />to build on their respective properties and will not have to participate in any future <br />assessment districts or have to contribute toward the preparation of an EIR, <br />technical studies, or other reports. As a condition of development, they would have <br />to build roadway improvements along their entire frontage and extend the <br />improvement across for 22 ft. of the total 29 ft. wide street , thereby improving <br />access. For these reasons those property owners do not have to contribute to all the <br />technical studies and the EIR for the remaining parcels on Laurel Way. <br /> <br />3. Consistency with Previous Actions <br />If Council agrees with these findings and conclusion, then it should also modify the <br />condition of approval for the developed property at 3726 Laurel Way (Wayne Aozasa <br />Property) so the conditions of that parcel and the appellant's property at 3718 Laurel <br />Way are consistent. It should change the condition of approval at 3726 Laurel Way so <br />that the owner of that property only needs to pay for the roadway improvement and not <br />contribute toward a future assessment district or Environmental Impact Report (similar <br />to what is being recommended for the appellant's property). If approved, staff will <br />contact the owner of 3726 Laurel Way and notify him of these changes. <br /> <br />4. Policy for Remainder of Laurel Way <br />However, all other vacant parcels along Laurel Way that are located westerly of <br />3726 Laurel Way would have to comply with the requirement that an EIR and <br />technical studies (geological, engineering, etc.) covering the entire undeveloped <br />area be prepared prior to any development in accordance with Council's policy <br />adopted in 1998. Those requirements, as stated in the 1988 staff report. include: <br /> <br />. Preparation of an environmental impact report for the entire area. <br /> <br />3 The reason for requiring a 22-ft. wide roadway instead of the total of 29 ft. is because the <br />property owner of the existing house across the street at 3729 Laurel Way does not have any <br />obligation to widen his/her frontage. Also to be fair to the subject applicants, they should not have <br />to pay for frontage improvements that benefrt the property across the street. <br />