PC 042507 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Pearce thanked Ms. Decker and staff for all their work in putting together the May meetings. She requested that staff notify the Commission when Commissioners will not be able to attend meetings, particularly when there are only three who might be present. Ms. Decker replied that staff would he happy to do that. She added that only non-controversial items are being scheduled for the special meetings and that those projects which may have some issues will be heard on the regular meeting dates on May 9 and May 23, 2007. Commissioner Olson inquired if the Grey Eagle Estates issue would be resolved by the time the Oak Grove item comes before the Commission. Ms. Decker replied that she is not able to answer that question at this time. She noted that the City’s policy is to investigate measures to mitigate concerns and other options for the developer. She assured the Commission that staff will revisit any neighborhood issues, the concerns of the testimony at the March 28, 2007 meeting, and the Commission’s sentiments that the staff report was huge and contained several inconsistencies. Ms. Decker indicated that staff would like to ensure that the documents are clear and that neighborhood interactions that have occurred are addressed. Commissioner Olson noted that during public input, an idea was put forth that there might be another solution to the entry and egress problem that does not involve the Grey Eagle Estates. He indicated that based on this, he went to visit the Grey Eagle Estates and found the proposed solution to be reasonable. He stated that he would like to have this considered at the meeting. He added that there was one other comment, the reference to Red Feather Drive as an alternative, that was presented at the public input but was not included in the staff report. Ms. Decker replied that one of the reasons the item was continued is to give staff more time to look into all the comments and testimonies. She noted that the alternatives previously presented in the staff report have been refined based on conversations with the Grey Eagle Estates neighborhood. She added that it would be the Commission’s task to look at the alternatives and make an evaluation. Ms. Decker stated that she would like to clarify the noticing requirements for projects. She indicated that based on the proceedings of the April 11, 2007 meeting, it appeared that the Commission was under the impression that the noticing requirement to get an item on the agenda is 72 hours and that the staff report does not need to be more than two pages. She pointed out that the Commissioner’s Handbook indicates that an item should be posted 72 hours before the meeting to be placed on the agenda. She noted, however, that the Pleasanton Municipal Code requires that public hearing items be noticed ten days in advance of the meeting by publication in a newspaper and noticing within the area determined by the Zoning Administrator to be adequate for project. She advised that the notification area legally required is 300 feet around the project site, but the City has been noticing neighbors within a 1,000-foot radius and sometimes greater, depending upon the sensitivity of the project, such as the Home Depot project or the Staples Ranch EIR scoping session for which 2, 958 notices were sent out. She clarified that an item can be placed on the agenda with only a 72-hour notification, but no action can be taken on it. She continued that there are two actual legal requirements: publication in the newspaper and notices within a 300-foot radius of the project site. She indicated that the City does PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 25, 2007 Page 7 of 11