PC 12/11/85 - Laserfiche WebLink

Minutes Planning Commissic 12/11/85 said he would be agreeable to having the words similar to "except that on the low side of a slope the walls can be a maximum of 35" if the Commission felt the need to impose it. Commissioner Innes asked if Mr. Fairfield envisioned two-story homes being built on flatter areas. Mr. Fairfield said he would but asked that no condition be put in place which would ban two-story homes as these are custom lots. Commissioner Lindsey asked about architectural controls. Mr. Fairfield said there would definitely be architectural controls and would not object to the requirement which would have each custom lot come back to the Design Review Board. Mr. Fairfield indicated that as part of their plan a detailed fencing program would have to be submitted to the City for approval. Commissioner Michelotti, asked about the walnut orchard and asked what percentage of the trees were anticipated having to be removed. Mr. Fairfield indicated 20-25o at the maximum - probably something less than that with site improvements, and perhaps 50% including house construction. Commissioner Lindsey indicated he would like to save his comments concerning park access until all comments were in. Becky Robinson, 3 Twelve Oaks Drive, read a letter signed by Bruce Robinson and Mr. Muldoon of Twelve Oaks Drive (previously furnished to the Commission members) against the proposal. They had concerns with traffic impacts and asked about the "Open Space" designation shown on the 1976 and 1982 General Plans for this area if Mr. Johnson had been guaranteed so many dwelling units as stated in previous testimony. Ms. Robinson extrapolated traffic figures and felt the reports furnished to the City were not sufficiently high. Mr. Swift then responded to the correspondence reviewing traffic projections and densities in the immediate area. Jacquie Oliverius, Chairman, Park and Recreation Commission, urged the Commission to not deny access to the 230 acre City park that is above the development. She indicated two resolutions were distributed earlier to the Planning Commission supporting the position of the Park and Recreation Commission. They would like public access with some kind of control. The Park and Recreation Commission had not addressed development of this area earlier on because they had no idea the Planning Commission would entertain the thought of denying access to the park on the ridge. She suggested the City take an aggressive stand and work with East Bay Regional Parks and not be engulfed by them. Commissioner Innes asked if the Park and Recreation Commission discussed condemnation procedure. Ms. Oliverius indicated that they have reviewed the State Codes and it appears as though believe East Bay Regional Park cannot proceed with condemnation without Pleasanton being able to say no. Mr. Swift indicated he had reviewed the law earlier in the day and without further research, it now appears condemnation procedures could not be - 4 -