Laserfiche WebLink
~ Ms. Hatryman recalled Chairperson Arkin's comments that it may be difficult for the <br />City to get a trailhead put in after new residents moved in. While the City would not be <br />legally prohibited from doing that, it may be a good idea to consider that possibility <br />during the PUD process, especially with respect to CC&Rs and disclosures. <br />No action was taken. <br />7. MATTERS INITIATED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS <br />Commissioner Blank rejoined the Planning Commission on the dais. <br />Residential Fire Sprinklers <br />Chairperson Arkin noted that the City Council did not wish to address the fire sprinklers <br />at this time. <br />Ms. Decker noted that Council would bring the matter of the fire sprinklers back in <br />January 2007 to consider placing it on the 2007-2008 Work Plan. <br />Commissioner Blank noted that he was personally disappointed that this issue, which had <br />been before the Commission for neazly a year, finally got to the City Council, only to be <br />pushed out even further. He was out of town during that meeting and was unable to <br />testify. <br />Chairperson Arkin noted that he had spoken to Fire Marshall Eric Cazlson, who believed <br />they could have given a better presentation to City Council. Council was concerned <br />about Planning staff's workload. He stated that Mr. Cazlson noted that it would be easy <br />to write a requirement for new construction; retrofitting existing buildings would <br />engender more controversy and public input. <br />Commissioner Blank noted that he would be happy with fire sprinklers in new <br />construction and was still haunted by the sight of the Heazst Drive house burning down <br />last Christmas. If the house had fire sprinklers, the situation would not have been as bad. <br />He was disappointed in the amount of time it took to get resolution on this issue. <br />Mr. Iserson noted that this was not a simple matter, and the issue of new constructions, <br />retrofits, and additions complicated the matter. In response to Chairperson Arkin's <br />question regazding whether anew-construction-only requirement could bypass Planning <br />staff, Mr. Iserson replied that it should go through Planning. He believed it was <br />unfortunate that the Fire Mazshall stated that an ordinance of this type should not have to <br />go through other stakeholders in the community. He noted that it was Pleasanton's <br />tradition to reach out to affected segments of the community. He was fully supportive of <br />fire sprinklers in homes. <br />Commissioner Blank expressed concern that this approach would result in an ordinance <br />~ that would take up to five yeazs to develop and compazed it to trying to boil the ocean. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 23, 2006 Page 15 of 17 <br />