My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 10/25/1995
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
PC 10/25/1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/10/2017 3:58:01 PM
Creation date
3/30/2005 2:38:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/25/1995
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 10/25/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Brent Wilcox, representing Mary Lou Wilcox, 3988 Stanley Blvd., noted that he also hopes <br />the Del Valle Parkway extension will be eliminated. At the community meeting, he noted <br />his opposition to the high density and hoped it could be reduced somewhat. From personal <br />experience, he feels the vehicle trips will be low enough such that this development will be a <br />good neighbor in the neighborhood. He noted a development next to Country Roads on <br />Stanley has an illuminated sign. He asked staff to investigate and would be opposed to such <br />signage for his project. He now supports the project. <br /> <br />Wanda Dives, 443 Division St., #29, stated she is very happy living in the Red Bear <br />apartments and feels that if the new project is as good, she is in full support. She also noted <br />that after living there for awhile, the train noise/whistle is not as bothersome as it was in the <br />beginning. <br /> <br />Linda Hughes, 1530 Rose Lane, stated she has some concerns about the project. One is of <br />changing the General Plan without tying a senior citizen project to the change because of the <br />very high density. Parking is another concern, some may not have cars, but their visiting <br />relatives/visiting nurses will need adequate parking. She feels that covered parking is <br />important for senior citizens to protect their cars. She feels the train whistle noise is very <br />loud in her home which is much further away than the project, and has knowledge of <br />someone who lives next to the track and their inability to speak and be heard when the train <br />goes by. Ms. Hughes is also concerned about the walkway, sees a need for a large gathering <br />room for the residents, and ease of exit in an emergency. <br /> <br />Mr. Iserson advised that staff received a phone call from Seth Bland saying he endorses the <br />project, would like to see a perimeter walkway, carports, more parking spaces, and a few <br />less units, if viable. Mr. Bland lives across Stanley Blvd. from the project site. <br /> <br />Mr. Madden commented on public hearing testimony. Regarding the walkway, he would <br />prefer to have people walking in front of the solid front doors instead of along the back with <br />glass doors. This impacts the residents' privacy. This design has been approved by the Fire <br />Department due to the fire vehicle access. Mr. Madden noted the project has a recreation <br />room to have community gatherings as well as his belief that the internal common area <br />walkways will create a sense of community. Regarding the hypothetical case from an earlier <br />speaker of an elder person who uses a walker negotiating the stairs in an emergency, Mr. <br />Madden advised that the hypothetical person would be better served in a congregate care <br />facility. The proposed housing project is for healthy, viable seniors, most likely someone <br />who has lost a spouse, and don't care to stay in large house. <br /> <br />Mr. Goldsworthy rebutted a comment made regarding the train noise. The soundwall will <br />mitigate the train noise to acceptable standards, it is the instantaneous whistle noise that is at <br />issue. In response to Commissioner Wright, Mr. Goldsworthy stated that there will be a set <br />of stairs for every five units, being no more than 75 feet away from the farthest unit. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br /> <br />Page 10 <br /> <br />October 25, 1995 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.