PC 12/08/99 - Laserfiche WebLink

Donna Miller, applicant, provided an overview of the family's history of residing in Pleasanton. She commented on the general merchandise store in downtown Dublin started by the family and her dream to restore that building as a store. Eugene Strom, applicant, commented on the development changes in the City of Pleasanton. He noted that numerous changes were made to this plan as recommended by staff, and that the plan will not adversely affect anyone. He noted that his intent is not to remove any trees. In conclusion, he noted that the plan has evolved as a result of a significant change and he requested that the Commission support the application. In conclusion, Mr. McDonald noted that the applicants support the staff's recommendations, with his clarifications as previously presented. Phil Braga, 9237 Klemetson Drive, provided the Commission with a memorandum from neighbors who are in support of the project, due to the applicant's effort in addressing neighbor's concern and resolving issues. However, that the neighbors have concern with increased traffic throughout The Preserve and with opening the entrance at Laurel Creek Drive and Foothill Road and Klemetson Drive to through traffic. Mr. Braga noted that three egresses to this development are too many and requested that Klemetson Drive not be opened to through traffic. He noted that opening of this road will impact his privacy and seclusion. He commented on the concessions offered by the applicants to the existing homeowners. In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Roberts, Mr. Braga noted that when he bought his property, he was informed there would be no through road and that development would be in another area. In conclusion, he noted he was in support of the application. Jeff Kyer, 9213 Klemetson Drive, noted his concurrence with Mr. Braga's statements and requested that there not be three access roads onto the property and that Klemetson not be opened to through traffic. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Commissioner Sullivan referenced the Foothill Overlay Guidelines and the map on page 570-4 and noted that this indicates the areas to be prezoned as the West Foothill Road Corridor Overlay and that this property is noted as such. Mr. Plucker stated that part of the property is part of the West Foothill Road Corridor Overlay; however, due to the location of the development and there being no impacts from Foothill Road, the standards are not applicable to this development. Commissioner Sullivan noted that staff should have explained this issue in the staff report. He noted that he has several concerns regarding those guidelines. Further, he noted that the guidelines say that homes are prohibited from being developed on foreridges with no ridges in the background. He noted that the map shows houses on top of the ridge and he expressed concern with the accuracy of the visual simulations. He stated that the top of the ridge where houses will be developed is higher than the tree line. Discussion ensued relating to whether the property should be considered part of the Foothill Overlay guidelines. Mr. Swift noted that he is confident that none of these homes will be visible from Foothill Road and so the Foothill Overlay District Guidelines requirements are met. Mr. Swift stated that the Foothill Road Overlay District guidelines should have been part of the analysis and was an oversight on the part of staff that it was not included in the staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES December 8, 1999 Page 5