My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 022515
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
PC 022515
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 4:45:14 PM
Creation date
8/10/2017 4:27:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/25/2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Resolution No. PC- 2015 -03 approving Case P15 -0008 was entered and adopted as <br />motioned. <br />Chair Allen called for a break at 7:45 p.m. and thereafter reconvened the regular <br />meeting at 7:55 p.m. <br />PUD -25, Mike Mever /Tim Quinn, Greenbriar Homes, Lund Ranch II <br />Work Session to review and receive comments on the application for <br />Planned Unit Development (PUD) Rezoning and Development Plan to <br />construct 50 single - family, two -story homes and related improvements <br />on the approximately 194.7 -acre Lund Ranch II property located at <br />1500 Lund Ranch Road, at the end of Lund Ranch Road. Current zoning <br />for the property is PUD- LDR/OS (Planned Unit Development — Low <br />Density Residential /Open Space) District. <br />Commissioner O'Connor recused himself due to a conflict of interest. <br />Brian Dolan stated that tonight's discussion is a Work Session; staff does not have a <br />recommendation, and no decisions will be made by the Planning Commission. He <br />explained that the purpose of the Work Session is to have one last conversation about the <br />various issues before starting the formal public hearing process on this project that has <br />gone on for many years. He indicated that this project has a fairly long history that has <br />been summarized in the staff report. <br />Mr. Dolan noted that there are several Planning Commissioners who are relatively new on <br />the Commission, and so staff wanted to make sure that they are provided the information <br />they need to make an informed decision when the project comes before the Commission <br />for the public hearing. He noted that some of the issues are complex, and some are simple <br />but present very difficult choices, and this Work Session would give the Commissioners an <br />opportunity to ask about them. He indicated that if staff cannot respond to the questions <br />this evening, staff would certainly like to know where the gaps in the information are so that <br />they can work on those and provide the Commission what it needs for the hearing. <br />Mr. Dolan stated that he would like to spend some time on what the primary project issues <br />are and the way he looks at them: <br />• Road Access. There is a lot of discussion in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) <br />about various alternatives; eight alternatives are evaluated. <br />• Measure PP. This is the first project where this has really been an issue that will <br />affect the outcome. <br />• Prior Council Commitments. These were made to various neighborhoods when prior <br />Councils were reviewing surrounding development over time, and various approvals <br />suggested that certain things were going to be done in the future related to the <br />development of this property. <br />• Environmental Impacts of Alternatives. Many alternative access routes have been <br />explored, and some present more environmental impacts than others. This <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 25, 2015 Page 11 of 46 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.