PC 08/11/82 - Laserfiche WebLink

Page 14 The Planning Commission then found that there would be significant impacts of case PUD-82-13 pertaining to aesthetics, geology, soils and fire protection, but that recommended conditions of approval would reduce all of those impacts to insignificant levels; and recommended approval of case PUD-82-13 subject to the conditions shown in the staff report dated 8/11/82 amending Condition No. 82 as follows: 82. That supplemental geologic investigation be conducted prior to final map approval and to the satisfaction of the City of Pleasanton, to determine if within 50' of any proposed building area, as shown on the development plan located westerly of the trench investigations conducted by Judd Hull and Associates (Project No. 865-A-66-A5); dated January 14, 1981, there is evidence of any active faults. Depending on the findings and recommendations of the supplemental report, the location of an active fault within 50' of a proposed building area shall be a basis for the elimination of that area as a buildable site; and changing Condition No. 1 to show that lots 15 and 14 be eliminated and they shall become part of Lot #13 and that the developer eliminate lot number 1, 2, 3, or 4 and divide its area among the three remaining lots and in no case shall there be more than 21 units total. ROLL CALL VOTE Ayes: Commissioners Doherty, Getty and Chairperson Lindsey Noes: Commissioner Jamieson Absent: None Abstain: Commissioner Wilson Resolution No. 2209 was then entered and adopted recommending approval of case PUD-82-13 as motioned. MATTERS FOR COMMISSION'S REVIEW Report on Video Games Mr. Harris stated that in addition to the staff report material has been given out this evening from Brad Hirst which should also be looked at. After discussion a motion was made and carried that this matter be continued to 9/8/82 to review the material. Ordinance Revision - Planning Commission Membership Mr. Harris reviewed the staff report. Mr. Swift said that in view of the fact that there were many qualified applicants for the recent Planning Commission vacancy the City Council thought it might be a good idea to use some of these people as alter- natives for other City Commissions and initiated an ordinance code change.