PC 03/23/99 - Laserfiche WebLink

support for the Specific Plan, preserving the quality and character of the area, and not placing restrictions on open space for future generations. He further expressed support for Chairperson Kumaran's statement to forward the Specific Plan as expeditiously as possible to the City Council. Ken Chrisman, 1944 Vineyard Avenue, suggested that the Specific Plan utilize more cul-de-sacs and not straight through-streets (i.e., on Lots 22 and 23), and not impose restrictions on open space that would affect future generations. Mark Posson, 3036 Chardonnay Drive, expressed appreciation to staff for their work on the traffic issues relating to Vineyard Avenue. He noted concern with noise and traffic volumes on Vineyard Avenue, cut-through traffic, and shifting the cost-burden on neighbors to resolve traffic problems. He expressed concern with the mitigation measure of reducing the speed limit on Vineyard Avenue as proposed in the staff report. He noted he would be willing to work with staff to identify further traffic mitigation alternatives. (Recess taken from 9:25 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.) Jack Dove, 3263 Vineyard Avenue, noted that residents of the Hacienda Mobile Home Park were not notified of the meeting. He commented on the future bridge over the Arroyo and the Bernal Avenue/ Vineyard Avenue traffic signal, and opposed the alternative plan for reducing Vineyard Avenue from four to two lanes. Further, he noted the safety concerns created for pedestrians and bicyclists on Vineyard Avenue beyond the nursery and noted that during the General Plan review, it was suggested that old Vineyard Avenue be maintained for local residents and bikes with the addition ora stop sign at the school. Further, he requested that the Commission only examine issues relating to this project and not be concerned with issues relating to Vineyard Avenue west of the Plan Area. Irmeli Vatanen, representing Brian Lin, inquired about the definition of "forever" as it related to open space and agricultural easements. She further inquired about alternative uses for land designated as Vineyard. Mr. Rasmussen noted the additional uses for Vineyard districts if vineyards prove to be economically feasible. Randolph Harris, One Kaiser Plaza, Oakland, representing the Foley Ranch, referenced a letter dated March 10, 1999. He expressed appreciation to staff for all their work. He expressed support for not permitting the future subdivision of Lots 29, 30, and 31. He further requested that housing on Lot 28 be reduced or relocated to the west part of the lot. He noted that Lot 28 east of the curve on Vineyard Avenue is visible from the Foley corral area. He further requested that the estate home in the Vineyard area be limited to the southwest area to minimize visual impacts and noted that the sound from two-story homes will project to the corral. Ralph Hughes, 4471 Stoneridge Drive, representing the Hatsushi property, referenced a letter dated February 16, 1999 and addressed issues relating to the proposed access roads serving Lots I, 2, and 3. He noted that the nursery has been in business for 28 years and pre-dates the homes located on Montevino Drive. He conunented on the triangular right-of-way that was dedicated to the City by Amador Savings for access to Lot 3. He suggested that the road previously envisioned be constructed for Lot 3 and the Clara Lane loop road connect only through Lots 1 and 2. He further spoke in favor of PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 6 March 23, 1999