PC 051111 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chandra, representing the residents of Site 7, the Pleasanton Gateway property, stated that they would like the following addressed in the EIR: 1. Traffic. The site was originally planned for Office use, which would have a different traffic pattern and would not impact the neighborhood as much because the direction of traffic would be toward the other side on Bernal Avenue; whereas rezoning the site to residential would direct traffic the opposite direction. Consider Valley Avenue from Bernal Avenue to Case Avenue, single lanes with roundabouts; Also consider Laguna Creek Lane connection to Valley Avenue; and Consider not only current traffic, not only with the proposed housing density, but also traffic with the new Safeway and the Bernal Sports Park, which would bring a lot of traffic to the area when soccer fields, basketball, and other sports are added to the already existing baseball fields. She requested that the traffic study be done while the school year is still in th session, before the summer break which starts on June 10. 2. Noise and Pollution. Pleasanton Gateway is close to the highway and train tracks. She requested that the study be conducted when trains are passing by and during highway peak hours to have an idea of what the residents will be faced with when more trips are added from increased housing development. 3. Protection of the Pleasanton Ridge, rolling hills, habitat, and rare species. This is considered the crown jewel of Pleasanton. She requested that the study ensure that adding homes to area does not take away from the crown jewel. 4. Nature. Consider how additional houses will affect the birds in the area, the different migration birds, and other rare species. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Blank noted that some of the Commissioners may be living within 500 feet of the sites. He inquired if these Commissioners will need to recuse themselves when the discussion of the sites comes back before the Commission, which may result in not having enough voting members in the Commission. Ms. Harryman stated that she would come back with a response at a future Commission meeting. Commissioner Blank stated that because of the proximity of some of the sites to the Livermore Airport, he would like to make sure that the projected growth of the Airport is included in the noise evaluations, given the fact that in good weather, most of the Livermore aircraft traffic will be north of I-680, and in times of inclement weather, most of the aircraft will be circling south of the airport runway and potentially right over some of the sites. Commissioner Olson stated that he wanted to weigh in on the possible inclusion of another site. He noted that at its last meeting, the Commission was asked to provide input regarding which sites it felt should be included, which it did. He indicated that he PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 11, 2011 Page 11 of 17