PC 11/09/83 - Laserfiche WebLink

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION 11/9/83 Page 5 Chairman Jamieson then asked for a show of hands as to persons in the audience present to hear case GP-83-12. A minimum amount of persons raised their hands. Commissioner Wilson then asked the applicant if they were willing to continue this matter to the next meeting. Mr. Niklaus said their only concern is to meet the 12/6/83 City Council hearing on general plan amendments. Mr. Harris suggested that this matter be continued to Monday, November 28, ]983, 8:OOpm and then it could go to the 12/6/83 City Council meeting. Mr. Niklaus said they contacted 12 homeowners but that only four attended their meeting. Commissioner Doherty then reiterated his concerns with lack of notification to the neighbors. Chairman Jamieson suggested that perhaps this matter should be continued to November 28, 1983. Frank Belecky, 892 Madeira Drive, stated he has occasion to go to this shopping center and there is a real parking problem. He asked staff the approximate number of parking spaces. Mr. Harris responded that there are approximately 200 spaces. Mr. Bel ecky then urged that more parking be provided. This matter was was continued to 11/28/83, 8:OOpm, Monday, by the Planning Commission. G_P-83-8, City of Pleasanton Application of the City of Pleasanton to amend the general plan land use designation from "High Denisty Residential" to "Medium Density Residential" or any other designation deemed in the public interest fora 6.6 acre site located at the southwest corner of Stoneridge Drive and I-680. Zoning for the property is PUD (Planned Unit Development)-High Density Residential District. A negative declaration of environmental impacts will also be considered. Mr. Harris presented the staff report. The public hearing was opened. Lynn McVicar, Pacific Urban Design, 255 North Market St., San Jose, represented Stoneson Development Company and spoke in opposition to the City's application for a genera). plan amendment. He stated the parcel is 7.1 acres in size and not 6.6 acres as advertised He stated that in 1981 as a result of a general plan amendment and PUD application, there were two public hearings held concerning this property and there was no opposition at that time. He stated the opposition occurredwhen Regis homes presented a proposal fora 128 unit project. He stated the major opposition at the last public hearing had to do with traffic. Stoneson Development retained Barton-Ashman to do a traffic study of the area. He introduced Jean Follette of Barton-Ashman. Jean Follette, Barton Ashman, 99 Almaden, San Jose, addressed her traffic report. They looked at trip generation high density residential v. medium density residential. She said her one page report is attached to the staff report. They found there would be a 290 trip difference between the two land use designations. She said the intersection will probably not increase drastically over the next 15 years. -5-