PC 01/27/88 - Laserfiche WebLink

iii F:i ng trai 1 s and staging area; she f eI t tree entry road shoul,~ not be a mai n ti-ioroughf are going i n at Stoneri dge Sri the but should look' like a rural-type entry way. She thos_sght all the Heritage trees st-,ould be preserved if possible; that the neighborhood park: site should be larger than proposed. Srie e:; presser great concern about ttae i rripact on traf f i c and also wanted an s_spdated traf # i c study. C`omrrii s5i oner E;erger supported tree previous opinions, stre5si ng that she was very concerned about the traffic impact and would 1 i ke to See an ,_epdated traf f i c sts_sdy. She was opposed to a type of lot and building that were alI similar and asked for a creati~fe t:ind of plan. She stressed the protection of wildlife; opposed any ~ i nd of bui 1 di ng on slide areas arid sri tri any destruction of the hillside. She indicated that side could not support tr',e project. Commissioner Hoyt stated that he had Spent some time 1oot~ing at the site. He favored 2?C:y units or less in density; felt traffic on Foothill and surrounding areas would be greatly impacted; was very concerned about the possibility° of city liability regarding slide areas. Chairman Lindsey said he felt this was the most sensitive building area irc Pleasanton. He was extremely disappointed with the pr oposed r,urriber of i ots and f eI t i t wool d 1 ook: i i ~=:e a i~~a3ar subdivision on a i',ili. His major concern was the city's liability regarding geologic problems that might occur. He told the developers that he felt they needed to wort: on sor~iettsirsg that would be more sensitive to that particular site. TMI_Seecifi~_~lans_City_of_Fleasanton Application of the City of Pleasanton for adoption of plans and policies relating to the TMI Specific Plan Area, an approximately 1~5 acre site located generally east of Foothill Road, north of Bernal Avenue, and west of Interstate 68~i. h7r. Lee presented the Staff report which recommended the Commission take public testirr,ony concerning trse r-errised project and provide staff and applicant with policy d~rect3osi. He stated tr'iat staff leas been working with applicant in order to con#orm to the Commission s previous recommendations. Don ~:olph, the project developer, mien Allen, CA. presented the application. He reviewed the changes of the plan, noting that a 5-acre neighborhood park has been included; density has been reduced to i.B unit per acre on Unit A, and rri3nimum lot size is i?,~~~Jf~ sq. feet. Density on Unit Es is planned at ~-6 units per acre with 1 of sizes of ,', C:C~Ct sq. f t. Publ i c tr-ai 1 s amounted 'to acres with an additional 4 acres allotted to Al vi so i~dobe Par-t:. He stated the r-evi sed plan caI I ed for al i gnmertt of Foothill Road; the addition of guard rails and bridge iRiprovesnents on Eternal Avenue; access to Foothi 11 3 iigh Sch ooI ; an i nterchange on I -~8t',; ar~d Chi I d access to Foothi l l t~::nol 1 s. Wage :'