PC 042600 - Laserfiche WebLink

an allowable backdrop to prevent homes from silhouetting against the skyline." Further, Mr. Plucker noted that the Commission is being asked to consider four recommendations by staff relating to the FAR relationship to lot size, clustering requirements, fees for tree removal, and applications to prior development, as detailed in the staff report. In conclusion, he noted that struts recommendation is that the Commission adopt a resolution recommending approval of Case PRZ-1 by the City Council as shown on Location Map No. 2, Exhibit A, and Exhibit B, except as modified by staff in the Analysis section and forward the proposed Code and guideline amendment to the City Council for review at a public hearing. Discussion ensued relating to heritage tree removal, the number of properties being affected by expansion of the sphere of influence, cooperative agreements between the County and the City of Pleasanton and City of Hayward, homes being developed within County boundaries, clarification of issues relating to the 22-foot height limitation for homes, and guideline applicability for homes built after 1990. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Arkin relating to whether the guidelines are in violation of any laws, Ms. Seto noted that the City is exercising its police power to limit development in the area and as long as economically viable use of the property is not eliminated for property owners the "taldng clause" of the U.S. Constitution is not violated. Ms. Seto noted that she has received approximately 20 responses from cities in California that have similar types of ordinances, which limit or restxict development in foothills. Commissioner Arkin requested that a visual analysis be performed from the BART train traveling west on Interstate 1-580. PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Barbara Young, 11249 Dublin Canyon Road, referenced her memorandum dated April 25, 2000 and expressed concern with the proposed guidelines and the effect of the 150-foot setback requirement on her home. She noted that she has applied for subdivision of her property and that the setback requirement will affect the economic value of her home. She advised the Commission that this property has been in her family for 40 years and she expressed concern with the specifications not being uniformly applied to ail property owners in the area. Mr. Plucker noted that this property's holding capacity is for two units as referenced in the General Plan. Chairperson Roberts requested that staff work with Ms. Young to clarify issues relating to her property. Margaret Tmcy, 1262 Madison Avenue, representing the members of the Preserve Area Ridgelands Committee, provided the Commission with a map entitled "Special Studies Zone and Landslides." She requested that Page 7, Item J, be clarified relating to the sentence containing a double negative "should not" and "do not." Ms. Tracy further noted that there are serious natural hazards contained in the overlay district, such as a landslide zone and earthquake fault zone. She noted that due to the natural hazards, development west of Foothill Road is a liability for the City and she inquires whether an economic risk assessment or liability assessment has been performed regarding potential development in the area and whether these reports are available to the public for review. She commented on the policies and goals of the General Plan and urged PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 26, 2000 Page 6