Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Goldade replied that she was referring to a residential accessory structure or a <br />garage. <br />Commissioner O'Connor asked if they have a limitation on the size of the barn. <br />Ms. Goldade said no. <br />Commissioner O'Connor asked if they have a suggestion or limitation on the number of <br />accessory structures. <br />Ms. Goldade said no. She added that residential accessory structures are proposed to <br />be within the development envelopes and so that will in fact limit what can be put on the <br />property. <br />Lee Fulton stated that the City has been here before and hoped that it will not make the <br />same mistake again of passing a plan that is guaranteed to promote controversy and <br />cost the City lots of wasted dollars. He noted that it is inarguable that the citizens value <br />the beauty of the ridge tops surrounding the City and that this was made abundantly <br />clear in the General Plan and through numerous times at the polls. He pointed out that <br />the objection to the current and past plans was not whether homes were to be built on <br />these hills but the placement of the building pads. <br />Mr. Fulton stated that the worst of the current plan is the proposed Lot 10, which is the <br />eastern sunrise horizon for hundreds of existing homes. He indicated that with the <br />exception of the "Hayward Hotel" on Santos Ranch Road, it would be viewed by more <br />homes on their horizon than any other home in Pleasanton. He noted that there are no <br />homes in Pleasanton that are built on horizons, and whatever is built on Lot 10 will be <br />silhouetted against the sky for hundreds of locations throughout Pleasanton. He added <br />that this building site needs to be relocated, and there are dozens of other sites on the <br />562 acres that would be infinitely more acceptable. He pointed out that now is the time <br />to make that decision; not when the whole project is approved, when whoever buys the <br />property will have to argue with hundreds of residents and have the project go to the <br />polls again. He concluded that it would be nice if the applicant truly worked with the <br />neighbors to come up with a workable project, unlike with the past two proposals. <br />Allen Roberts stated that he thinks it would be great if this process could provide some <br />guidance to staff and the applicant to avoid the controversial parts of the previous two <br />projects. He indicated that he believes something could be built on this parcel that <br />would be acceptable to the community and neighborhood, but he did not think it is there <br />yet. He added that there are things that were lightning rods in the past projects and are <br />still lightning rods in this project, and the same mistakes are being repeated. <br />Mr. Roberts stated that there are two things on the Work Session topics that he would <br />like to talk about: (1) House sites. He noted that this was a lightning rod in the last <br />project where the only view of structures on this parcel are downslope views; and what <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 28, 2012 Page 9 of 33 <br />