PC 022719 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Brown referred to the excel spreadsheet which was appended to the staff report and said if it states "new," whether another committee has requested it or if staff was looking for a ratification. Mr. Dolan said this list was staff-generated based upon what staff has heard and items that have been presented during discussions with the Council. He said the items must still be voted upon by the Council, and they are more likely to vote on those that were included in the Commission's list. Commissioner Brown inquired about the criteria for the Commission to consider when focusing on three to five items, and the requirements needed to make the list as opposed to a newly created Planned Unit Development (PUD) application, in order for staff to dedicate resources within that two-year period. Community Development Director Gerry Beaudin responded that there are no formal criteria, however there is a reality in the amount of staff resources, the size of the policy shift and whether it involves urban growth boundaries, annexation and other larger policy questions. Commissioner Balch recalled a recent, larger project known as the Carpenter's project, which involved a couple of workshops, and he inquired how this had been treated by staff in the context of the work plan. Mr. Beaudin clarified they wanted to put a new office building on the site, and the project was processed through the typical planning process, rather than being called out on the work plan. Chair Allen stated two projects on the current list (1) East Pleasanton in regard to looking at the El Charro Road extension and (2) public notification of policy were both listed two years ago, and she asked whether staff could comment as to what has or hasn't been done in regard to these items. Mr. Beaudin responded that staff has a draft of the public notification discussion, but the program was never finalized. The thought was to bring the idea of noticing individual sites for development applications through a visual representation of the project. He told the Commission they may want to explore this further, while confirming it is having less to do with public hearings and neighborhood conversations and is more about City policy. Mr. Dolan said the first item was an extension of an earlier Council decision not to re-initiate the East Pleasanton planning process at that time; however, there was an interest in returning to it as a way to make a commitment and move the process forward. Although the project had not been prioritized in the last work plan, the applicant nonetheless began to work with the County on an application, which the City opposed, with lack of a Specific Plan in place part of the reason why the City did not want to see that project move forward. Commissioner Balch referred to the Housing Strategy Element and asked how it's different from numbers one and three, above the list. Ms. Clark explained that items one and three are more legislative monitoring and policy responses, including updating codes and ordinances in response to changes in state law. Item Planning Commission Minutes Page 11 of 18 February 27, 2019 Development if found to be in substantial decibels] at any point outside of the property plane, unless otherwise provided in this chapter." According to the PMC, "noise level" means the maximum continuous sound level or repetitive peak level produced by a source or group of sources as measured with a subject to review and approval by the City Landscape Architect prior to building permit issuance. P18-0269 Planning Commission Page 10 of 10 Page 6 of 10 ake place underneath or within 5-feet of the dripline of the existing trees. PUD-131 Planning Commission Page 12 of 13 of a demolition permit, or the first building permit, whichever PUD-131 Planning Commission Page 5 of 13