Laserfiche WebLink
<br />MATTERS INITIATED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS <br /> <br />1. Commissioner McGuirk called staffs attention to Case Z-91-216 and a letter regarding <br />the Holiday Inn. He expressed concern regarding landscaping conditions for the Holiday <br />Inn. Mr. Swift replied that the landscaping was included in the conditions of approval, but <br />he would double check the situation. <br /> <br />Vice Chairman Hovingh stated that the agenda would be reversed somewhat in order to hear <br />the shorter cases before the Ruby Hills presentation. <br /> <br />OLD BUSINESS - PUBLIC HEARINGS <br /> <br />Tentative Tract MaD 6447. S & S Prouerties <br />Application to subdivide an approximately 9 acre site into 40 single-family residential <br />lots located at 10890 Dublin Canyon Road. Zoning for the property is PUD-MDR <br />(planned Unit Development) - Medium Density Residential) District. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift presented the staff report recommending approval of Case Tentative Tract Map <br />6447 subject to the conditions of the staff report. <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Brad Hirst, 6280 W. Las Positas, represented the application. He stated that staff has <br />worked very well with him; he has reviewed and concurs with the conditions of approval. <br /> <br />Vice Chairman Hovingh called attention to Condition 14 in regard to the retaining walls. <br />Mr. Hirst explained that the walls would be of reinforced concrete. <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wright discussed the composition of the retaining walls with Mr. Swift. He <br />also called attention to the tree analysis and expressed concern as to who would decide what <br />trees might eventually need to be removed. He also felt that measures should be taken to <br />remove any poison oak on the site. Mr. Swift replied that the conditions of approval address <br />his concerns. <br /> <br />Commissioner Michelotti wished to state for the record that she has never been in favor of <br />this project and did not support the application because of what she determined was a <br />negative impact to the entry of a scenic corridor. She also expressed concern about <br />soundwalls along 1-680 and felt they are not appropriate. However, the matter before the <br />Commission tonight is whether the application is in conformance with the Tentative Map, <br />and she will support that portion of the project. <br /> <br />Minutes Planning Commission <br />November 20, 1991 <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />- <br />