PC 03/09/83 - Laserfiche WebLink

MINUT~$ PLANNING COMMTSSION 3/9/83 Page 4 Chairperson Lindsey then asked Mr. Dahms if the density stayed reasonable, the neighbors had sufficient screening, including trees and dumpsters relocated would they feel any better about the project. Mr. Dahms said they would but in the long term he believes it would be a disservice to his neighborhood to have this project approved. Chairperson Lindsey disagreed with the last statement of Mr. Dahms because Pleasanton has a great need for rental housing and doesn't believe renters are any different than anyone else. Mr. Dahm indicated that everyone has the right to their own opinion. He said he knows housing is needed for the business parks, but doesn't believe they have to be all located in their area. He felt Hyde Park is an example of an attractive multi- family residential development. Ed Roquette, 3436 Windsor Court, President of the Pleasanton Homeowners Association, stated they have 625 homes in the area which he represents. He stated he would not duplicate the comments of Mr. Dahm and the neighbors on Weymouth but would support all of them on behalf of his group. He stated that their Board of Directors passed a resolution stating the density is too high and can't understand why there has to be in excess of 10 units per acre for this property. He further stated that each unit to the east will have 12 dwelling units in them all of which will have the capacity to invade their backyard privacy which currently exists. He addressed traffic problems of the area, specifically with only two entrances to the Meadows. He felt the project should have an environmental impact study done as the Initial Study indicated that there is no public controversy which is incorrect. Mike Grazadei, 3955 Chillingham Court, represented the Board of Directors of the Pleasanton Meadows Homeowners Association. He stated they concur 100% with the document presented by the residents of Weymouth Court. He also asked if there would be a homeowners association for the proposed project. Chairperson Lindsey said there would be. He also referred to Condition No. 22 about availability of sewer lines. Chairperson Lindsey said this is a standard condition imposed on all projects. Mr. Grazadei then asked about the colors of the project. He also addressed the location of transformers as mentioned in Condition No. 30. Chairperson Lindsey explained that we always attempt to have them screened and/or moved. Mr. Grazadei then asked about Condition No. 59 and the developers responsibility to a left-turn lane south of Fairlands. Chairperson Lindsey said this doesn't refer to the construction, but rather participation in the cost. He then asked about plans to widen Santa Rita Road. Mr. Warnick indicated the street will be widened to Suttergate as part of the North Pleasanton Assessment District. Mr. Grazadei then asked about the amount of the performance bond. Chairperson Lindsey stated this is a premature question at this point. Mr. Grazadei stated that Item 2 of the Initial Study refers to high density across the street from the proposed project and believed this to be an insignificant matter as he did not see the connection. He then asked about Item 9 regarding the impact on public services. Mr. Warnick explained. He then stated he disagreed with Item III, paragraph 4 as the project would devalue their property. -4-