PC 072308 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Fox noted that the A District permits one single-family dwelling, which would mean that Zone 7 could actually build a house in the area without any planning process. Ms. Decker clarified that Zone 7 would not be able to do so because the property would be incorporated into the City of Pleasanton, and Zone 7 would need to apply to build a home on City property, which would go through a design review process. She added that the City reviews all design review projects for property within the City boundary, whether they are incorporated or unincorporated. She noted, as an example, that owners in the unincorporated area of the City known as the Remen Tract are required to go through the City design review process, although the area is part of unincorporated Alameda County. Chair Blank inquired if, should someone come forward with an application for a house in a straight-zoned parcel and met all of the criteria and was denied by the administrative body, the person could sue for discrimination. Ms. Harryman replied that this area is designated as trails and that there are other overriding documents in addition to the pre-zoning for Agriculture. Commissioner Fox inquired if this is inside the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) line of Measure D. Ms. Decker referred to Exhibit C and noted the blue line that defines the urban growth boundary. She noted that the Martin Avenue Buffer Zone is in the northeast quadrant, which is within the UGB. Commissioner Fox requested verification that the City cannot adjust the UGB line inward in order to develop without Alameda County's agreement. Ms. Harryman verified that was correct. Commissioner Narum stated that it seems to her that annexing this into the City is far better because it gives the City control over the land in terms of the planning process and ensures that the City has a trail that is a key part of the Trails Master Plan. She noted that working with Zone 7 to get the trails opened up has been a priority and indicated that she trusts the City Manager and the City's legal staff to arrive at an agreement that will protect the interests of the City such that no houses will be built on the site. Commissioner Narum moved to find that PRZ-42 is statutorily exempt from CEQA and that the pre-zoning is consistent with the General Plan and to recommend approval of the proposed pre-zoning of the 13.26-acre site to Agriculture (A). Commissioner Olson seconded the motion. Commissioner Fox inquired what the zoning of the current arroyos in the City. Ms. Decker replied that the arroyos are held in various ownership by Alameda County, Zone 7, the City, and private ownerships that go to the center or off center of the arroyos. She added that not all the arroyos have the same zoning designations and that in many cases there are no easements necessary unless PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 23, 2008 Page 18 of 25