PC 052307 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chairperson Fox noted that Item 5.a., PAUP-4, Jennifer Hosterman, was continued to May 30, 2007. She further noted that Item 6.b., PUD-05-02M, James Happ/Kenneth and Pamela Chrisman, was continued to the next available meeting date. 5. CONSENT CALENDAR a. PAUP 4, Jennifer A. Hosterman Application for an animal use permit to allow a red tailed hawk to be kept in the rear yard accessory structure of an existing residence located at 2922 Chardonnay Drive. Zoning for the property is R 1 6,500 (Single Family Residential) District. This item was continued to the May 30, 2007 meeting. b. PTR 7813, Charles Austin and Scott Austin Application for a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide an approximately 30.15-acre property into eight single-family custom home lots, four parcels that will be transferred to adjoining property owners, and with the remaining land dedicated to the City of Pleasanton for open space purposes. The subdivision map is submitted in conformance to the previously approved applications PGPA-11 and PUD-58. The property is located at 3459 Old Foothill Road and is zoned PUD LDR and AG (Planned Unit Development – Low Density Residential and Agriculture and Grazing) District. Ms. Decker noted that a letter from Mr. Lee Henderson had been received. Commissioner O’Connor noted that a letter from Mr. Sandeep Duggal had been received on the same item. Ms. Decker noted that staff had spoken to the neighbors who had written to address their concerns and assured them that their concerns would be included in the staff report. Some of those items would be conditioned to be examined and confirmed by the Planning Director prior to the final subdivision map, which was a common practice. She noted that it would afford time for the adjacent neighbors to address the landscaping and other issues. She added that the letter from Mr. Henderson had requested that a westerly portion of the site also be dedicated to him; that request was not part of the PUD approval, nor was it consistent with the PUD approval. She noted that the Planning Commission was to determine that the map, as presented, was in conformity with the PUD approval and the subdivision map. The Planning Commission did not have the authority to require the applicant to grant lands to individuals or to consider decreasing the amount of open space for the Austin property, which would require a PUD modification. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 23, 2007 Page 4 of 20