My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
08 ATTACHMENTS 9 -16
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
120115
>
08 ATTACHMENTS 9 -16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/24/2015 11:46:19 AM
Creation date
11/12/2015 11:12:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
12/1/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
08 ATTACHMENTS 9-16
NOTES
THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM 11-3-2015 MEETING
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
270
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mike Meyer, President of Greenbriar Homes Communities, Applicant, stated that <br /> Greenbriar has built six high-quality communities in town in the past and has made <br /> many contributions, including the 320-acre community park on the Bernal Property <br /> which he is delighted to see has now been improved and looks great. He indicated that <br /> tonight, he is before the Commission to talk about a new community; Lund Ranch. He <br /> noted that they basically have worked very hard with their community outreach to <br /> respond to people's comments that they wanted maximum open space and minimum <br /> development. He stated that Greenbriar wants pre-determined house sizes; it wants <br /> respect for the hillside ordinance, and it wants quality homes that fit into the larger <br /> community. He noted that they have been very environmentally sensitive: they have a <br /> small footprint, they have public trails, they are building on the flattest portion of the <br /> property, and the EIR states that their alternative, Scenario 1, is the environmentally <br /> superior alternative. <br /> Mr. Meyer thanked staff and the Commission for their work in defining the key concepts <br /> here regarding slopes, the ridge, and setbacks. He indicated that Greenbriar agrees <br /> with those concepts and hopes the Planning Commission will agree as well. He then <br /> made some comments on a couple of issues: <br /> 1. Artificial slope. Past Planning Commissions and City Councils have been <br /> consistent in saying that they should go back to natural slopes, and as long as <br /> those natural slopes are less than 25 percent, they should be allowed to include <br /> them in the community. He indicated that, in effect, Option 1 is the alternative <br /> they support. <br /> 2. Ventana Hills agreement. As Mr. Dolan earlier stated, the City Attorney has <br /> indicated that this is not legally enforceable, and Greenbriar was not a party to <br /> any of these agreements about Lund Ranch. The Bonde Ranch approval was <br /> made in 1991. At the same time, Shea Homes was conceptually designing a plan <br /> for 150 homes on the Lund Ranch location which would require two accesses. <br /> Now, many years later, Greenbriar is down to 50 homes with only one access, <br /> which avoids any significant traffic or circulation impacts. Then, in 1992, the <br /> North Sycamore Specific Plan was done, and Lund Ranch was not a part of it <br /> either. Finally, in 2008, Measures PP and QQ were passed, the point of which is <br /> that the electorate intended to protect the integrity of the hillsides. <br /> Mr. Meyer stated that he cannot understand why controversy over Measure PP is being <br /> invited over a road that is not necessary. He commended staff for laying out three <br /> options as to this road consideration, and one of those options, Option 1 is to maintain <br /> this trail, which is their plan. He noted that Options 2 and 3 are to build the foot of this <br /> road which is about four football fields long. He asked Rick Hopkins, the project's <br /> biologist from Live Oak Associates, to discuss the impact of this additional road. <br /> Rick Hopkins, Ph.D., Principal and Senior Conservation Biologist/Ecologist at Live Oak <br /> Associates, Inc. in San Jose, stated that he has been providing ecological services on <br /> various iterations of the Lund Ranch projects since the year 2000. He indicated that <br /> during this time, they have evaluated a number of project designs, all of which have one <br /> thing in common: each new iteration worked to reduce impacts to sensitive and <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, June 24, 2015 Page 11 of 45 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.