PC 121102 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chairperson Maas advised that item 6.d. would be continued to a future meeting. Adam Lubow, 852 Bonita Avenue, spoke in opposition to this item. He believed that there was a dire need for assisted living and affordable housing for seniors in Pleasanton, but not in this location or to this scale. He noted that the neighbors who were not in favor of this project were not NIMBYs, but he believed that the project was extremely out of character for the existing residential neighborhood. He expressed concern about noise, garbage, light pollution, safety of schoolchildren, and odors from an institutional facility in a residential neighborhood. He believed that a full-blown EIR was warranted, and that the traffic study generated by Dowling & Associates was inherently flawed. He noted that it did not address the delivery traffic or trash pickup. He expressed concern about the enormity ofthe facility, and did not believe it was appropriate for the neighborhood. He questioned the veracity of the applicants' claim that similar facilities existed in similar neighborhoods; he noted that the other facilities were in mixed use neighborhoods. He believed the tree plans were not accurate with regard to the final height of the trees. He believed that the language in the church bulletin regarding opponents of the project discouraged other opponents from speaking out. He stated that the neighborhood and the project would be better served by building the facility in a different, nonresidential location. Chris Smith, 798 Bonita A venue, noted that she was also speaking for her husband Michael. She had spoken to an AMR Ambulance representative, who confirmed that there had been 19 emergency calls since January 1,2002. She noted that she was not against the facility, but opposed the location of the facility in their neighborhood. She expressed concern about the safety of the neighborhood children due to increased traffic. She noted that a copy of her remarks had been submitted to the Commission. She expressed concern about grading, privacy concerns, and building height and proportionality to the surrounding buildings. She was pleased to hear of the applicants' compromise regarding the three story building, but did not believe the two story buildings were acceptable. She noted that the Church had previously requested that the homes surrounding the church be limited to a single story, and believed that the Church should be subject to the same limits. She was concerned about the size of the project, and provided a comparative table of similar facilities in Pleasanton. She noted that several other properties in town were available for sale, and that they were approved for this use. Tib Warner, 640 E. Angela Street, expressed concern about the Dowling & Associates traffic analysis, and believed that it contained misrepresentations, inaccurate assumptions, and incorrect conclusions. He noted that contrary to the traffic study, Angela Street did not have sidewalks, and believed that the 25 mph speed limit did not reflect reality. He noted that only one car can pass at a time on that street. He noted that the conditions of approval for St. Augustine's development stated that the use of the site was to be church or church-related, specifically church, rectory, school, convent, and community hall. Because of the narrow approach on Angela Street, he had personally witnessed several close calls to both cars and pedestrians. He was aware of the death of a child on the street PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES December 11, 2002 Page 10