PC 031319 - Laserfiche WebLink

c. PUD-130, P18-0078/0079/0080/0081, Ponderosa Homes Work session to review and receive comments on applications for various entitlements for four parcels (10807, 11021, 11033 Dublin Canyon Road and the parcel west of 11021 Dublin Canyon Road) totaling approximately 128.5 acres, including annexation, general plan amendments, and Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezoning and development plan to demolish two homes and construct 33 single-family detached homes with related on- and off-site improvements, and public land dedication and improvements. Item 6.c. was continued to the next meeting on March 27, 2019. 7. MATTERS INITIATED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS None 8. MATTERS FOR COMMISSION'S REVIEW/ACTION/INFORMATION a. Reports from Meetings Attended (e.g., Committee, Task Force, etc.) There were no reports from Commissioner's regarding meetings attended. b. Future Planning Calendar Ms. Clark gave a brief overview of future items for the Commission's review. c. Actions of the City Council No action was taken. d. Actions of the Zoning Administrator No action was taken. 5. ADJOURNMENT Chair Allen adjourned the meeting at 9:26 p.m. Respectfully submitted, GIV�ISL l Stefanie Ananthan Recording Secretary Planning Commission Minutes Page 18 of 18 March 13, 2019 in alignment across the plans. Mr. Beaudin said he was going to bring the conversation back to the environmental process, because the current discussion is moving more towards a policy conversation. He continued to say that from an environmental review perspective, the idea of a commercial site or residential project, staff has taken an initial look and it is a lower impact relative to traffic, if it does shift to a residential use. Therefore, creating the list of options does not create more complexity from an environmental review perspective. Regarding the comment from the speaker earlier regarding underground storage tanks, there are standard mitigations that exist for those transitions and plans required to ensure the soils and other contamination issues are addressed. Staff would ensure all of this analysis is done. The same issue with a PUD and there would be further discussion with the community as to whether the project is appropriate and additional environmental review at that time. Again, he stressed that this is a healthy policy discussion on the horizon as to whether those sites are in or out. From an environmental perspective, staff is comfortable that the document allows that policy conversation to take place. Commissioner Ritter lastly said his biggest issue is to make sure the environmental report is not overly restrictive in its analysis, where if the whole City was wiped out by a natural disaster, the roads and buildings could be rebuilt. He wants to be sure they are encompassing the big picture where they can put a garage underneath and two units above so they are not over-restricting their analysis. Other than that, Commissioner Ritter said he thinks the DSP came up with some good recommendations at the last meeting and he endorsed most of those. Mr. Beaudin confirmed that a motion was not needed and he thanked the Commission for their comments. Planning Commission Minutes Page 17 of 18 March 13, 2019 anticipation that the envelope, location of the driveways, number of trips, location of the parking structure, hotel, etc. will require more analysis and details, especially around traffic. Planning Commission Minutes Page 16 of 18 March 13, 2019 nutes Page 7 of 18 March 13, 2019 m a head start. Their two-year-old tested highly in both English and Spanish when they began kindergarten which was a huge benefit. Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 18 March 13, 2019