|
T
<br />by Livingston and Blayney, dated March 20, 1964. :ir. Campbell read a letter in
<br />favor of Mr. Martin's proposal from Mra. James D. P.amey, 6168 Pleasanton-Sunol
<br />Road, dated May 12, 1964, and a letter from Mr. Ted Fairfield, of MacKay and Sompe;
<br />dated Flay 8, 1964, enclosing copies of a new preliminary subdivision map of the
<br />subject property indicating Planned Unit Development. Mr. R.A. Martin waa present
<br />in the audience and stated he has contacted many residents of the subject area and
<br />found the group in opposition to hie proposal does not represent the Happy Valley
<br />area as a whole. He pointed out that pressure of increasing population is affect-
<br />ing the entire State, and requested the Commission not to consider the size of
<br />lots to accomplish an end. He said he cannot economically develop the subject
<br />property on one-half or one acre sites. The plan he now proposes in conjunction
<br />with MacKay and Sompe is a compromise plan. Ted Fairfield then made a presenta-
<br />tion of the revised plan, and prefaced hie remarks by stating that of the 46 aq.
<br />miles of the new Pleasanton General Plan Area only 20.71 aq. miles is actual
<br />usable area. He enumerated the densities of other completed oz contemplated
<br />tracts in Pleasanton: from 3.4 to 4.8 dwellings per acre. The proposal in queet-
<br />ion has a density of 3.4. He pointed out that new home construction in the sub-
<br />ject area is practically stymied because Alameda County allows new construction
<br />only on property fronting on public roads, and at present these are Happy Valley
<br />Road, Alisal Street, Sycamore Rcad and Amber Lane. Mr. Don MacKay was preeent
<br />in the audience and said he has done engineering work for Mr. Martin for many
<br />years. He is of the opinion that Mr. Martin's proposal will enhance the property
<br />in the area ae his houses are in the $25,000-$30,000 price range. He stated
<br />further that it ie not good planning to create acre lots on the subject location
<br />in the proximity of industry and major highways. Mr. Ray Snider, Jr., President
<br />of Alisal Improvement Club, was preeenC in the audience and spoke in opposition
<br />to the proposal. He reminded the Commission of the petition on file containing
<br />93 signatures of residents of the area opposing the subject proposal. He said
<br />Pleasanton is a special area and should not necessarily follow what other com-
<br />munities are doing. The motive of profit should not be at the expense of other
<br />people. The preeent residents have a considerable investment in the area, and a
<br />number of new homes have been built on Happy Valley Road in the past year. The
<br />present residents chose their neighborhood as a desirable place to live, and Mr.
<br />Snider asked that the area be retained in its present character. He feels that
<br />the residents of the area have a responsibility to Pleasanton and Pleasanton has
<br />a responsibility to them, and requested that the Commission recommend a minimum
<br />of one-acre lots. Mr. and Mrs. Andrew Holm also spoke briefly in opposition to
<br />the proposal of Mr. Martin. Speaking in favor of Mr. Martin's proposal was Mr.
<br />L.S. Yoieal, 5980 Pleasanton-Sunol Road, and Mre. Cheater Scott, who ie the owner
<br />of eleven acres on Sycamore Rd. which is landlocked. She said the area ie
<br />desperately in need of utilities and fire protection, and she is of the opinion
<br />that Mr. Martin's proposed development will not disturb the present residents of
<br />the area.
<br />Mr. Ted Fairfield stated the proposed lot sizes range from 8,000 to 15,000 aq.ft.,
<br />with a mean lot size of approximately 10,000 eq.ft. In percentages, the lot aizea
<br />are as follows: 8,000-9,500 aq.ft.= 447.; 9,500-10,500 eq.ft.= 18~; 10,500-11,500
<br />aq.ft.= 21~; 11,500-12,500 aq.ft.= 14~. There followed considerable discussion
<br />by the Commission, during which Commissioner Rega said he believes there is a
<br />shortage of one-acre sites and feels the subject development should have lots of
<br />a minimum of approximately one acre. Chairman Landon said a designation of some-
<br />thing in the nature of RE-~ appeals to him, and thought there should be an in-
<br />crease in the percentage of the larger lots. Commissioner Antonini was of the
<br />opinion that there should be a mixture of lot sizes with a maximum of one-half
<br />acre--lots larger than that would not be economically feasible. The subject
<br />development would not have any bearing on the teat of the neighborhood. Commis-
<br />sioner Johnston was in agreement with the proposal, and said too large lot sizes
<br />would lead to too expensive houses. Upon motion of Commissioner Antonini, second-
<br />ed by Commieai.oner Lozano, the following resolution was adopted by the following
<br />vote: AYES: Commissioners Antonini, Johnston and Lozano; NOES: Commissioner Rega
<br />and Chairman Landon; ABSENT: None.
<br />RESOLUTION N0, 305
<br />WHEREAS, the application of R.A. Martin, 1091 Enderby Way, Sunnyvale,
<br />for annexation of a parcel containing approximately 20 acres;
<br />located southeasterly of the intersection of Pleasanton-Sunol Road and
<br />Sycamore Road, with a request for aingle•family zoning upon annexation,
<br />has come before this Commission;
<br />
|