SR 05:069A - Laserfiche WebLink

prospectiYe purchasers be made aware that she and her sister had the right to have farm animals and farm equipment in accordance with the North Sycamore Specific Plan. She noted that the speed of vehicles in front of their home has increased and would like the stop sign to be reinstalled. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Roberts regarding the removal of the stop sign, Ms. Greene replied that it was removed in February 1998 and that the City Council noted that it would be replaced if warranted. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Roberts regarding the right to farm in this Specific Plan, Mr. Pavan confirmed that the ability to keep livestock was detailed in Condition No. 27.a. on page 7 of the Conditions of Approval. He suggested that it be expanded to include the right to farm with appropriate machinery. In addition, Condition No. 23.a. provided for the installation of a chain-link fence on the common property line separating Parcels 1-4 from the property owned by Tom and Mary Greene. Staff had discussed that fence with the applicant, who agreed to that condition. Steven Liu, 5816 San Carlos Way, noted that the existing sidewalk on San Antonio Street/Sunol Boulevard seemed to be sufficient to serve the neighborhood. He believed the trail was underutilized. He did not believe the trail would be appropriate for bike riding because of the stairs. Vanessa Kawaihau, 871 Sycamore Road, noted that Mission Court had originally been intended to go through before the golf course project was envisioned. She noted that in 1993, Pleasanton's Master Trails Plan referenced a single-use trail (pedestrian- or bicycle-only) and indicated a pedestrian trail east of Sunol Boulevard between Mission Park and the North Sycamore Plan area. She believed that this was a good area to support walking. She noted that Mr. Bach had requested that the trail not go in until he developed because of his horses and possible liability. She noted that she supported smaller houses. Dennis Hood noted that he was building a home at 6067 Sycamore Terrace, which he purchased from Mr. Bozorgzad. He stated that he was strongly opposed to the pedestrian path and was concerned about the security of his house and the safety of his young children. He was also concerned about potential liability to him and did not want the privacy of his home negatively affected by people using the path. He noted that there were other trails nearby that were not being used to their full potential. He had no objection to the size of the houses and noted that he was having a difficult time in the building permit process. He was not aware of an inherent right to a view in the City and noted that his house design was in conformance with the PUD guidelines. He would like to see more consistency with the guidelines and their enforcement so that families trying to develop a home can do so without spending excessive monies to accommodate demands for unrestricted views. Arend Verwey, 6080 Sycamore Terrace, expressed concern about a public path and added that he and his wife had to hire maintenance workers to clean the path themselves. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FebrUary 9, 2005 Page 16 of 22