CCMIN062679 - Laserfiche WebLink

Determination of Conformance with the General Plan for an ll-lot residential PUD (Planned Unit Development). proppoed on 55 acres of the 73 acre site located west of Foothill Road and north of Longview Drive (Continued from 5/22/79 and 6/12/79) Mr. t~rris presented his staff report dated ~y 15, 1979, regarding this matter. He stated the staff has changed their position with regard to the 1996 Urbanization Line because full urban services (i.e., fire, sewer, water, etc.) would be required. He stated that staff feels the project is in conformance with the General Plan with regard to open space because of the density proposed. ~yor Brandes stated that public testimony would be heard at this time. Mr. William Hirst, 147 Bernal Avenue, representing the applicant, spoke regard- ing this item stating that the property is entirely within the City Limits, else- where urbanization lines follow the City Limit line, urbanization line takes a jog as to ~is property, property participates in water assessment district, property participates in the West Pleasanton Sewer Assessment District of 1967, the 1968 General Plan and 1976 General Plan contemplate upper portion of this parcel's 55 acres being developed into low density residential configuration, and strip along Foothill (15-18 acres) is not being considered at this time. He stated the text of the General Plan which defines public health and open space makes it clear what the planner had in mind with property of this sort. He read a portion of the General Plan regarding this property and stated he concurs with staff on this. Concerning the urbanization line, Mr. Hirst stated his client felt quite strongly as to the upper portion of this parcel relative to density of ldu/5ac does not constitute urbanization. He said urbanization line in this area does not make sense. He also referred to the Mohr-~rtin area that a density ldu/5ac is to be considered as urbanization. Councilmember Wood expressed concern with 55 acres of the 73 acre site. Mr. Hirst stated they have not prepared any reports or proposals for the balance of the property but are only working on preliminary drawings at this time. He also stated he did not object to having the entire 73 acre site reviewed. Councilmember Butler stated he felt it was not proper to address the lower areaat this time. Mrs. Micky De Freitas, 1963 Foxswallow Court, spoke stating she did not want a General Plan amendment for this property because she wants to move there. Mr. Bill Gibson, 2140 Foxswallow Court, stated he does not feel five acres is urbanization, adding that urbanization relates to tract homes and not to this type of development. Mr. Gene Finch, 582 Sycamore, stated he does not believe this should be con- sidered urbanization based on information presented, as this is a unique develop- ment and he plans to be living there. Mrs. Susan Scott, 1590 Foothill Road, stated it is her understanding that urbanization line is not a density question but rather a timing question. Mr. Harris stated that staff would be recommending a Hillside Planned Develop- ment for this project rather than Planned Unit Development. He stated that HPD has small lots and common open space and concentrated development. 9. 6/26/79