PC 10/13/99 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Arkin and Kumaran noted they are not in favor of proceeding with this item at the present time. A motion was made by Commissioner Kumaran, seconded by Commissioner Arkin, to delay this item to a future date. ROLL CALLVOTE AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Commissioners Arkin and Kumaran Commissioners Maas and Chairperson Roberts Commissioners Kameny and Sullivan None Ms. Seto noted that the motion failed due to a lack of majority. Discussion ensued relating to the effects on the project by eliminating the by-pass road. Commissioner Arkin commented on air quality and provided the Commission with a memorandum listing items that would mitigate air quality. In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Roberts, Commissioner Arkin noted that without these items, he would not be in support of approving application. Chairperson Roberts noted she was trying to look at the project as a planner and examine the project as a good project for Pleasanton. She expressed concern with the grading and noted this could be conditioned to eliminate some of the grading which would mean taking out lots 14 - 17 of the production homes. She expressed her pleasure with John Spotorno's statement about the nine custom lots. She noted that after examining the property and realizing how steep it was, she would not be in favor putting houses on it. She noted that the General Plan does not allow anything over 25 percent grade, and commented on her familiarity with grades over 25 percent. Further, she noted it is not good for the land to do that much cutting. She stated these houses would be designed well and worked into the slope, and she would like to see this in the medium-density area. She noted that cutting and filling is being utilized to make the land fit the houses rather than the houses fit the land. She noted that houses could be built without a lot of cutting and filling. Chairperson Roberts further noted that more time is needed to examine issues relating to eliminating the dirt. She noted that the visual is not nearly as bad as expected. She noted her concurrence with staff that the detention pond could be relocated and would mask most of the development from Pleasanton. She noted that this is an isolated area and she would say it was leap frog development if not for the golf course and road being installed. She noted that a requirement of the General Plan is that developments will be one and a half miles from a park, and even though a "tot lot" could be installed, the development needs something else. She noted the design guidelines in the Specific Plan are specific about setbacks and that the Commission will be dealing with those at another time. She commented on the homes that were designed to be the entrance to the golf course from the by-pass road, and she noted that staff's suggestion for hollywood driveways, where you have two exits, would be more in keeping with the Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 1999 Page 17