PC 083116 - Laserfiche WebLink

there would be at least 10 parking spaces that would be needed for that community room as dictated by that section of the zoning code. Dan Lacey: Thanks for having me. I'm Dan Lacey. I live at = Valley Trails Drive. I agree with Ed on the location of the facility; the restroom and the meeting room. I think the restrooms should be made open to the public with the exterior entrance of it all. I'd also like to say I've been a boardmember of the former Valley Trails Homeowners Association for about 15 years. I'm still active with the current group and we've done a lot of work with the Ponderosa group. We've seen the progress through the years of the different plans for that lot. You may know that we fought diligently against them. This is one that most of us agree with. You know, there are a few dissenting voices about a bathroom and NIMBY (not in my back yard) situations, but I think that's all I'd like to say but I'm all for this current plan. Bob Anderson: Good evening. I'm Bob Anderson. I live at = Shenandoah Court. I've been a resident of Valley Trails for about 35 years and have seen many different proposals for this piece of property and by far this is the best one that's been presented. I think it has a win /win situation for not only Ponderosa but for Valley Trails and the City of Pleasanton. I'd like to keep and have the amenity of the clubhouse because as Ed said, the church is where we meet on election day to vote and we also need a place to vote. The church has been very supportive in this proposal as well as most everybody in the neighborhood. You're not going to please everybody 100% of the time, but I think we have a large group of people who are for this proposal and would like to see it go forward with everything that Ed has said and what Pam has said. So that's all I have to say. Carolyn Lacey: Hello. I'm Carolyn Lacey. I live on Valley Trails with Dan Lacey and we've lived there for 19 years and had to look at the church —I don't know if you guys know, but probably for 5 years there was a lawn chair on top of the church and I'm sorry Bob, but it was in disarray and it's still not quite up to par and it would be nice to see something developed there and this is a great plan. We've been working with Ponderosa and Pam and we just all agree with it. The bathrooms I do believe should be open to the public. I think like Muirwood or Creekside or the sports park, they lock and we can use them. The kids need them. I need them when I walk the dogs. I'm in support of the project and $300,000 to improve Valley Trails would go a really long way. We've needed some improvements in there; our gateways, everything. I know that they're willing to do those things for us so I'd be nice to have that, and that's all I have to say. Sandy Temberg: Thank you. Good evening Chair Ritter and members of the Commission. My name is Sandy Temberg and I reside at M Isle Royal Court in Valley Trails. I feel kind of like the little dissenter up here. I think it's a great infill project for this site. I have no problem with Ponderosa's recommendation and the work that my fellow residents have done; however, I do not agree with putting in a restroom facility. I'm glad you brought up the conversation about the neighborhood park differences. I don't necessarily think that restrooms in a neighborhood park are warranted. In some cases they are, but I don't believe they are in this one. There's a lot of maintenance, on -going capital costs with a public facility including a restroom facility that we're just not set up to accommodate, especially if the City does not want to take over the maintenance of the restroom daily as well as long term. In addition, I think that even though the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 31, 2016 Page 13 of 58