PC 012313 - Laserfiche WebLink

undermines the intent of Item E -1. He indicated that he was adding his support to the importance of Item E -1 and to the importance of rewording and rephrasing Item E -3. Kay Ayala cautioned the Commission to go slowly in making law in order to get this right and easier for future staff, Planning Commissions, City Councils, developers to come and understand the laws clearly. She noted that it is doubly complicated because the City Council Minutes and recommendations that the Commission has before it were from the old City Council, and there is now a new Council of four members who are surely relying heavily on this Planning Commission to study the issues thoroughly. She urged the Commission not to rush but give the Council thought -out recommendations. Ms. Ayala stated that the complication comes with approved PUDs, the ten prior agreements associated with the Lund Ranch II development, and this is one she cannot let go of because she sat on the Council when these PUDs were approved, and she knows that the Council felt that the road structure should go through the PUDs that were approved in Bridle Creek and Sycamore Heights. She noted that she cannot see a group of people from the early 1990's, starting in 1991, who worked with the City Councils and Planning Commissions to make sure laws were put in place so they could, in their minds, approve of development but know that they were secure and Lund Ranch Road would not go through. She indicated that this is one part of the ordinance that she will fight with that community to save the laws that were put in place: Specific Plans, General Plan, and PUDs that these people have fought every step along the way from the 1990's. She noted that they were at the Council meetings and Planning Commission meetings reminding the powers that be that these promises were made. She stated that Pleasanton is a Community of Character, and she is appealing to the Commission not to move too quickly on this until it understands all the implications of PUDs. She added that she has asked staff for a long time to do the work for the approved PUDs and adjacent PUDs to these properties, in the same way that the Ventana Hills Group has taken to time to do its research, but staff has not done this to date. Ms. Ayala stated that another complication is the manufactured slopes. She noted that when she first read about manufactured slopes, she thought it was ridiculous and that they were making this up. She added, however, that after she was taken on a tour of the Lund Ranch II property just this week, she can now see their argument. She agreed with staff that there was a hill and a ridge, and a road was just cut through this ridge. She stated that she did not think it was the intent for anybody to say that that could not be built upon. She recommended that the Commissioners visit the site and understand what they are putting into law because her mind was changed on the manufactured slopes after her tour and that she believes the Council. She added that the complication goes further to the Spotorno property, whose owners also want to develop. She indicated her agreement with Mr. Roberts regarding the slope issue. She stated that she thinks people probably do not understand exactly what a slope map is, and walking the land and looking at slopes is different from seeing it on paper. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, January 23, 2013 Page 15 of 44