11 ATTACHMENT 04 - Laserfiche WebLink

because she noted that neighbors are already impacted by parking and that after the modernization on Stanley Boulevard, parking will only be allowed on north side of the street and none on the south side. Ms. Cruzan expressed concern about the type of housing proposed. She stated that she feels there is a need for more affordable housing, and the proposed development is for single-family homes which are among the more expensive types of housing. She suggested developments featuring smaller, affordable homes for younger families and seniors due to the proximity to the Downtown. She added that home prices in the $700,000's are steep for even moderate incomes and requested that more affordable housing be built in the neighborhood. Ms. Cruzan objected to the cutting down of almost all but two of the heritage trees. She acknowledged that the developer will pay $60,000 to replace the trees, but it appeared to her that the trees will be planted elsewhere in the City and inquired whether this was a fair trade for the neighborhood. She added that it will also take a long time for trees to grow back to the size they are now. She disagreed that the existing trees are ugly, noting the existing habitat in the area, and asked that the number of housing units be decreased to save a few more heritage trees. She noted that trees provide more than just aesthetics; they also preserve neighborhoods, filter out particulate matter created by traffic, and provide a noise buffer from trains. She stated that she thinks in many years, the area will be a sea of houses without trees, and indicated that she would appreciate anything the Commission could do in this regard. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Blank stated that at the last workshop, there was a lengthy discussion about the Pleasanton Heritage Association (PHA). He inquired if staff made a determination as to whether the Association needed to be involved. Mr. Otto replied that the plans were routed to the Association, and its representatives had provided a comment letter which was attached to the report. Commissioner Blank referred to Condition No. 8, stating that there was a lot of discussion about the language used on deeds and disclosures being provided. He suggested that the phrase "in plain language" be added so the disclosures are easily understood. Commissioner Blank added that also of concern in Condition No. 8 is that there is a lot of discussion about noise. He indicated that he understands the City is not going to try and mitigate the train whistle noise, which is not stated in the conditions. He stated that he believes that, having lived near a train track for many years, it is one thing to hear the train going by but quite a different thing when the whistle blows. He suggested that language be added to address the Union Pacific Railroad and possible noise including whistles and vibration impacts of the railroad. EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 15, 2010 Page 6 of 9