PC 031412 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Meyer indicated that he wanted to address the seven discussion questions posed by the staff to the Planning Commission and share their thoughts on them: • They have no problem with the methodology; however, they do not know what it should be. • With respect to the question of having open space in some lots beyond what would be graded, their intent is to create an area of privacy and develop lots that back up onto the hill so that while they may remain beyond the fence, they can include drip irrigation to provide privacy to those homes. • Man -made slopes have to be taken care of and ought to be exempted from the 25- percent rule. • As to the grade differentials, they would much prefer to build on a flat pad; houses would be less visible as opposed to the stepped pads with large backs where the houses are larger and more obvious. • Their preference is to for Middleton Place to stay open. • They do not think an amendment to the North Sycamore Specific Plan is necessary because Lund Ranch is not part of that Plan. • If the Commission concurs with the determination that streets are covered by Measure PP, they will have more streets connecting to Sunset Creek Lane, and they will have to cross over water and jurisdictional lines, which seems to be opposed by the City's General Plan. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Blank stated that he did not actually keep count of the number of speakers but maybe at least 15 speakers brought up the issue of traffic. He noted that when he was reviewing the list of questions and comparing it with his notes, it struck him that nowhere in this list is the Planning Commission asked to provide its perspective on traffic or traffic - calming measures or traffic studies. He asked staff if this was an oversight or if the Commission can add a question to address that. Mr. Dolan replied that staff wants as much feedback as possible from the Commission. He indicated that staff will have a very good handle on what the traffic impacts will be and that there will be a complete analysis as the project moves forward. He noted that this is the first venture into this plan, and implicit in the questions about access are questions about traffic. He added that it is suggested that there should be more access points, then traffic will have to be distributed to different locations, and that is really one of the fundamental questions that should be dealt with. He noted that there is really not a lot that can be done about reducing the amount of traffic unless the project is reduced. He indicated that there are challenges to the other connections, and he does not know at this point exactly how much 25- percent slope they would have to go over to get these connections. He indicated that it is clearly physically possible to get there without doing very much at all; there is a creek and open space and some environmental impacts to it, particularly on Sunset Creek Lane, but it is clearly physically possible. He added that he thinks it is also true that if the plan included those connections to begin with, there might have been an entirely different audience here tonight. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 14, 2012 Page 24 of 35