PC 05/27/81 - Laserfiche WebLink

years and that the Fairgrounds would not be an appropriate site for BART. Commissioner Jamieson sad also that the economics y,ve changed and he agrees with Mr. Madden': comments. Chairperson Wilson said he doesn't understand why a depressed rail can't be used. He stated there should probably be one station at Stoneridge and one at George Oaks property before it is sold. Commissioner Doherty con- curred I-580 is the way to go with a swing to Livermore at some point. A motion was made by Commissioner Doherty, seconded by Commissioner Lindsey that a recommendation be made to City Council that routing of BART through the community should be along the north side in or near the I-580 corridor and requests two stations for the City; with the first being at or near Stoneridge and the second being near Santa. Rita Road and I-580. ROLL CALL VOTE Ayes: Commissioners Doherty, Getty, Jamieson, Lindsey and Chairperson Wilson Noes: None Absent: None Resolution No. 2007 was then entered and adopted concerning the Planning Commission recommendation for the location of BART. Chairperson Wilson removed himself from the Commission. PUD-(HPD)-80-12, Castlewood Pro erties,Inc. App ication o Cast ewoo Properties, Inc. for development plan approval for a Hillside Planned Development for the approximately 48 acre site located on the west side of Foothill Road, just north of Bernal Avenue for a 24-lot, 25,000 sq.ft. minimum lot size, single-family residential development. The property is zoned HPD (Hillside Planned Development) District. A negative declaration of environmental impacts was also considered. Vice Chairperson Getty continued the public hearing of 5/20/81. Commissioner Lindsey asked if the lots are smaller than those on 12 Oaks Dive. Mr. Harris stated, no, that the lots are about 20,000 sq. ft., but that the building sites on Twelve Oaks Drive are considerably farther apart. Commissioner Jamieson asked questions about the width of the road, who will be paying for the widening, etc. Mr. Warnick explained. He stated it would take a significant amount of grading to widen the road. The public hearing was opened. Art Dunkley, Castlewood Properties, Inc. spoke. He stated that in his opinion findings could be made to grant a density adjustment. In fact, the ordinance calls item 'adjustment' not a 'bonus'. He spoke to condition No. 1 stating you cannot cluster and have open space and at the same time have lots spread out, but nonetheless they will combine Lots 6 and 7 and have four homes rather than five. Concerning eliminating Lot 24 he suggested access from the turn around be common with Lot No. 13. Condition 69 as modified he said he would like rolled curbing, otherwise the development would end up lokking like Pleasanton Valley. He said he would even like concrete curb and gutters on one side and asphalt bern perhaps on the other. He said he would like flexibility. He presented the revised Condition No. 10 and stated his reasons for it. He stated the ravine is significant and distorts the WIS calculation. Mr. Dunkley presented exhibits for all to see. Commissioners asked for clarification on Condition No. 10. It was explained. -4-