Laserfiche WebLink
<br />PREV-552. Threehand LLP <br />Work session to review and receive comments on an application for an eight-lot <br />development consisting of seven single-family lots and one lot for a City water tank on an <br />approximately 20-acre site located at 5 Windy Oaks Drive (formerly 1680 Vineyard <br />Avenue) in the Vineyard Avenue Corridor Specific Plan Area. Zoning for the property is <br />PUD-HR/OS (Planned Unit Development - Hillside ResidentiaI/Open Space) District. <br /> <br />Commissioner Roberts recused herself from this item because her property was adjacent to this <br />site. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pearce took Commissioner Roberts' place on the dais. <br /> <br />Ms. Decker summarized the staff report and requested the Commission's comment and concerns <br />regarding this site. She noted that the site had been staked and displayed photo montages to <br />reflect the tank site only. The specific issues to be addressed were the tank siting and location, <br />and she displayed the site on the overhead screen. She noted that the locations were not <br />precisely in accordance with the "blobs" as located in the Specific Plan. She pointed out the <br />origina110cation for the tank in relation to the new location. She noted that the applicant entered <br />into a partnership with the City with respect to the construction and alignment of the tank. The <br />actual lotting pattern has been changed because of the new location of the tank. She noted that <br />there was a concern about the seasonal drainage swa1e on Mr. Brozosky's property, which is <br />adjacent to the location ofthe proposed entry road. She pointed out the various site features and <br />noted that the oak tree adjacent to Old Vineyard Trail was actually in poor health because PG&E <br />had chopped it up and that it was likely to be removed along with the retaining walls. <br /> <br />Steve Cusenza, Public Works Department, discussed the rationale and details of moving the <br />water tank and displayed the relevant site on the overhead screen. He noted that the City had <br />been looking at this tank since 1998 and added that the ridge was fairly narrow. He added that <br />the original knoll was fairly visible from the rest ofthe City and that the new site provided better <br />screening with the trees. He noted that the new site was best in terms of environmental <br />screening, with the least amount of off-hauls. The tank had been enlarged by the City, and of the <br />1.4 million gallons, 1 million gallons would be needed for the Vineyard Avenue Corridor. <br /> <br />In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Fox regarding the safety measures with respect to the <br />water tank in the event of an earthquake, Mr. Cusenza noted that 99 percent of the buried tanks <br />were reinforced and that this particular tank was concrete-reinforced and pre-stressed. He noted <br />that reinforcing steel was built into the base, walls, and the roof, all of which were overdesigned <br />to handle seismic events. He described the details ofthe siting and construction of the tank in <br />response to the Commissioners' questions. <br /> <br />In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Pearce regarding whether this was a typical siting for <br />a water tank in a residential area, Mr. Cusenza confirmed that it was a very typical placement. <br />He added that they were typically buried to reduce visibility. <br /> <br />EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, MaTch 8, 2006 <br /> <br />Page I of4 <br />