PC 022515 - Laserfiche WebLink

go up through Sunset Creek Lane or Sycamore Creek Way, then it has to go through Lund Ranch Road. He indicated that, in his opinion, he would push towards supporting the citizens on the original intentions made a long time ago on the development of that area. Commissioner Balch noted that the issue of Measure PP is the issue of the structure definition, which is a broad slippery slope. He added that Measure PP was a general voted item. Commissioner Ritter said yes and added that he supported it. Commissioner Balch noted that it was passed, regardless of who did or did not support it. Commissioner Ritter agreed that it was passed by the vote of the people, and everyone should support it. Commissioner Balch agreed. He added, for the sake of further clarification, that if Measure PP says a road is a structure and access is provided through Lund Ranch Road, then those commitments are not being honored. He questioned how that can be reconciled. Commissioner Ritter replied that if Measure PP says that the road cannot go through Sycamore Creek Way, then it has to go through Lund Ranch Road, based on the interpretation of Measure PP. Commissioner Balch noted that prior commitments then cannot be upheld. Commissioner Ritter stated that the law was changed, not by the City but by the citizens of Pleasanton. Chair Allen inquired if there is another option. She stated that she wanted to see how much one could argue this position that if one believes a road is a structure, it would preclude Sunset Creek Lane, and if one also believes that Pleasanton is a community of character, it is then important to honor the previous commitments that were made even though they are not legally binding, then one could say it is also a challenge to put it through Lund Ranch Road. She asked if that then leads to the question some folks in the audience asked earlier regarding the minimum number of homes that could be built on the site, for instance, a project with ten homes.. Commissioner Balch stated that the project would then be exempt. Chair Allen said yes; however, there would still be a development here, but with only ten homes as allowed by Measure PP. She added that there are certain considerations on that too. She asked staff if this is even a legally practical option to consider. Mr. Dolan replied that he did not think putting in ten lots plus the expense of going up the hill to Sunset Creek Lane is a feasible project, and it sounds like it would get really hard. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 25, 2015 Page 37 of 46