PC 082802 - Laserfiche WebLink

- Commissioner Sullivan noted that the Commission shared the public's frustration and concerns. He noted that regarding a Tentative Map, the Planning Commission was very limited in the scope of its powers. The Commission may only determine whether or not it was consistent with the General Plan and the Specific Plan. The Commissioners may not take other considerations into mind, but was able to add the conditions to the Resolution. He noted that City Council may take the political considerations into mind, and he encouraged the public to address their concerns to the Councilmembers. The Plarming Commission recessed for a break at 8:54 p.m. Chairperson Maas reconvened the meeting at 9:04 p.m. d. Vestin2 Tentative Subdivision Map 6951 and PUD-99-03-1M, EU2ene C. and Carol Strom. William Kolb. and Donna Miller Application for a vesting tentative map and modification to an approved PUD development plan to subdivide 55.4 acres into 12 new single-family lots, two lots for existing single-family homes, public street and infrastructure improvements, and remainder parcels for a public park, common open space, and a senior care facility. The subject property is located at 11393 Dublin Canyon Road and is prezoned PUD (Plarmed Unit Development) - LDR, C, PH&S, and WO (Low Density Residential, Commercial, Public Health and Safety, and Wildlands Overlay district). ,.- Jerry Iserson presented this staff report. He detailed the history of this project. Staff has concluded that the Tentative Map is in substantial conformance with the Development Plan. Staff recommended the following changes to the development plan: I. Lot 10 changed from a flat pad graded lot to a split pad lot, in response to a request by the owner of Lot 34, which is adjacent to Lot 10; 2. The grading of Lots 4,5, and 6 have changed slightly to allow better transition between the lots. The homes would still be lower than the height of the adjacent knoll. Mr. Iserson noted that the minor modifications to the PUD were not directly tied or related to the Tentative Map. Staff believed the five modifications, as detailed on page 3 of the staff report, were reasonable and minor. Regarding Item 4, staff believed that the grading on the two split pad lots (Lots 3 and 10) were a superior approach, and there would be negligible legal impact. Mr. Iserson noted that Item 5, which allowed solid fencing on the side interior property lines of Lots 1 and 6, was consistent with the fencing plan on Lots 7 though 10. Traditionally, privacy fencing was allowed on interior side property lines between neighbors' backyards. He reexamined this item since the staff report was written, and ~ believed that the Commission may want to discuss a slight change to that item with the Plarming Commission Minutes August 28, 2002 Page 14