PC 041200 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. MacDonald further expressed concern with the stucco condition and he noted the applicants desired the two developments to have corresponding designs. He noted the Preserve Development is opposed to the development having all natural material due to it creating a jagged edge between the two developments. He noted that the applicant concurred with staffs recommendation for the 50 percent color. Further, Mr. MacDonald addressed Condition No. 10 and noted the applicants' request for requiting recordation of a final subdivision map within three years of City Council approval of the PUD Development plan due to the applicants not being in a hurry to develop. He stated that the applicants desire to select a developer that will work with the Preserve neighbors and work with the requirements of the Pleasanton staff and not be in a hurry to process the tentative map before selecting a developer. In conclusion, Mr. MacDonald requested that the Commission uphold the General Plan by approving the project. In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Roberts, Mr. MacDonald noted that the applicants have worked with the Preserve development relating to design, and that the Preserve development prefers that the two projects are similar. PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Dave Dockter, representing the House of Worship, 1102 Dublin Canyon Road, noted that he is a neighbor to this project and has not received notice of this hearing. He noted he was informed of the hearing when he discussed another issue with the Planning Depaxtment. He stated there has been a lack of public notification to adjacent neighbors due to neighbors being past the 1000 foot mark. He stated that he is not opposed to the project; however, he expressed concern with the impacts to traffic from this project, and requested that the development team conduct a workshop meeting with adjacent neighbors. Commissioner Kameny noted that it is staff's requirement for public notification. Commissioner Sullivan stated that the notifying procedure should be changed and that Mr. Dockter has a valid point. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Arkin, Mr. Dockter responded that approximately three neighbors and a small development have not been noticed. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Discussion ensued relating to the applicants' request for the three-year development map timing. Chairperson Roberts noted that after the last meeting she examined the visuals, and she stated that the house on the top of the hill in the Preserve development is the visibly prominent building when traveling on the freeway. Further, she noted that the church blends in well with the surrounding hillside and the only place you may be able to have a moving view of this development is at the front of the entrance to the Preserve development. Commissioner Axldn moved to approve staff's recommendation No. 1 and 2, with a modification to Condition No. 27 to remove the first two sentences; with a modification to Condition No. 8 to PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 12, 2000 Page 3