CC MIN 2013-09-23 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Angela Kraft Cross stated four reasons for her concerns about the housing development. She stated this area was a fragile canyon ecosystem with a big housing project; the proposed additional cars on a narrow road were dangerous; the mention of landslides in the EIR seem to not be taken seriously; and the vertical slope safety guidelines were ignored. Ms. Cross urged Council to vote against this project. Rich Guinon lives directly below this project and he does not see this working out well. He is opposed to the project due to too much noise and dirt. He contested that his house was listed over 3,000 ft and that is not the case. Ron Erickson said that the builders were pushing the dirt down instead of carrying it out. Also, he mentioned how he had felt vibrations and how it was impacting his house. John Barron lives east of the property and is a geologist. He spoke about the two rocks that underlie the slopes and the area. He shared that detailed geological studies are needed; Laurel Way is on slope failure rock; and soil needs to be tested prior to figuring out the stability of the hillside. Mr. Baron advised Council to delay the detailed geotechnical modeling studies to establish slope stability and require that deep borings and related geotechnical modeling studies be completed prior to road grading and extensive tree removal in the Laurel Way Development. Michelle Ross owns a home and is against this development. She does not think the lots are buildable and finds that none of the lots meet the size for building. Lynda Bronehaul is in support of the project. She believes that the EIR has already addressed the concerns, the professionals did the studies, and so the project should be moved forward. Richard White believes that the lots are not 1926 lots and are lawful. He would like to know if the Superior Court would side with the City's report on this development. Mr. White questions the staff's report and he opines that there will be problems with this development if moved forward. Beverly Purrington lives on Vista Drive and spoke of the transformation of the EIR. She said that City Council did the right thing when it first sent back the EIR to the Planning Commission. She said that six months ago the Planning Commission almost did the right thing raising multiple issues and questions, but they moved forward approving the EIR. Ms. Purrington opined that the revised EIR was more cosmetic, and so no real changes or improvements were made, including addressing mitigations or the amount of lots mentioned or not mentioned in the project. Rick Hunter addressed the Council to object the Planning Commission's decision of March 26, because they did not take into account the financial returns of the property owners, particularly in Condition 19. He discussed Alternative B's formula of slopes and square footage based on hillside slopes. He then proposed 2,000 sq. feet and he believes the Planning Commission was incorrect in making an alteration for solely CITY COUNCIL September 23, 2013 MEETING MINUTES PAGE 9 MINUTE BOOK NO. 64 Page No. 444