Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes <br />August 27, 1986 <br />Planning Commission <br />Mark Evanoff, representing People for Open Space, 512 Second <br />Street, San Francisco, suggested additions under Program 9.2. <br />After the phrase 'lots of record' add "that front on an existing <br />public roads and are adjacent to sewer and water service <br />lines..." He suggested the City drop Policy 12. Should the City <br />find it necessary to continue with Policy 12, he suggested adding <br />the phrase 'after study zone for consideration of and adding <br />"land uses consistent with the East Bay Regional Park District, <br />and to create a 9200 acre park, and Alameda County's agricultural <br />land use designation and the City of Hayward's land use <br />designations." He suggested dropping program 12.3 and 12.4, <br />Pages II-18 and II-19 of the General Plan. <br />Richard Combs, 4443 Second Street, Pleasanton, stated that the <br />EIR and General Plan prepared are excellent and complimented <br />Mr. Lee, Principal Planner. Mr. Combs addressed Policies No. 8 <br />and lo. Policy No. 10 - he felt a committee or group similar to <br />the environmental monitoring committee should be formed to allow <br />citizen assistance and participation in determining the needs <br />with respect to residential growth. Policy No. 8 - Mr. Combs <br />read from the Community Facilities Alternatives in the <br />Environmental Impact Report. He felt this alternative is more in <br />keeping with the philosophy of the residential review committee's <br />recommendations and more closely fulfills the goals of Policy No. <br />8 on Open Space. Here again, a method to achieve Policy No. 8 to <br />preserve open space would be to form a citizens' committee. <br />Mr. Combs asked that the General Plan not include the figure <br />4,000 units for the ridge area because the figure will be used as <br />gospel by development people. He didn't feel this recognized the <br />studies of EBRPD and the City of Hayward and backs the City into <br />a corner. He also felt establishing a figure of 4,000 units is <br />premature. Mr. Lee stated that staff has recommended this <br />program be deleted. <br />Marjorie Lebar, Dublin, asked what adverse effects Policy 9.2, <br />"Restrict development of habitable structures within Public <br />Health & Safety areas about 670 feet in elevation or greater than <br />25% in slope on Pleasanton and Main Ridges to single family homes <br />on existing lots of record which blend in with the local <br />topography and vegetation," would have on the Open Space Area. <br />Mr. Lee stated that staff recommends it be included with the <br />adoption of the General Plan. Ms. Lebar then suggested that the <br />"lots of record" should be set back a month or so. Commissioner <br />Innes commented that there have been no lot splits as far as he <br />knows in the area. Mr. Swift indicated that most of this area is <br />in the County of Alameda or Hayward. The zonings as they <br />currently exist on the property in these jurisdictions would not <br />allow subdivision. <br />Irene Weinreb, Bay Area Council, stated growth control policies <br />in housing have a negative effect on housing inventory. She felt <br />Pleasanton should add 5,000 more units. She asked that the <br />growth management policies be revised to align housing and <br />business growth, a reservation of sewerage for housing be made, <br />subregional planning be done with the surrounding communities. <br />- 3 - <br /> <br />