|
. ~ ~
<br />c. PUD-69- Stoneagn Develo ent Cor oration
<br />Application to rezone from the R-1- 500 Single Family) District to the P.U.D.
<br />(Planned Unit Development) District that portion of ]and described as Parcel 1-9,
<br />Assessor's Map Book 941, Bloek 1050, and Parcel 4-2, Assessor's Map Book 941,
<br />containing 30 acres, more or less.
<br />Chairman Garrigan opened the Publie Hearing. A presentation was made by the
<br />architects for Stoneson, Fisher & Friedmen. This presentation was conducted by
<br />means oP colored slides showing photographs taken of a similar development in
<br />Alameda, California, and drwaings depicting the various sections of the development.
<br />Mr. Rod Friedman, who conducted the presentation, demonstrated the aingle-
<br />family cluster concept within the cul-de-sacs contained in the interior of the
<br />development, with the balance of the area facing Springdale Drive, Stonedale Drive
<br />and Stoneridge Drive fronting on single-family, some multiple and two proposed
<br />school sites. The focal point oP the development is Gold Creek, with the homes
<br />clustered on either side of it, connected by walkways throughout the development.
<br />The ob,7ective was to eliminate the necessity oP automobile traffic and parking for
<br />the recreational area because of the interconnection of the walkways throughout
<br />the development. Recreational facilities containing a swimming pool would be
<br />available to the residents, with the thought that a second swimming pool might
<br />be constructed. The theme was one of open-space park areas. After the showing
<br />of the slides, many questions were received from the floor:
<br />Mr. Jack Benson, 4968 Hillcrest Way - Had question regarding the parking situation
<br />in the cul-de-sacs. He feared that there would be insufficient parking for the
<br />residents, forcing them to park their vehicles in the streets. It was explained
<br />that the design was such that it discouraged parking on the street and driveways
<br />and by normal standards, this development would have more than two to one in
<br />the way of parking facilities. There was an additional question regarding the
<br />turning radius in the cul-de-sacs for fire trucks. This was adequate with a
<br />32 Pt. radius on the curb. An additional protection feature concerned the Pact
<br />that emergency vehicles could go up a cul-de-sac and if necessary go around the
<br />rear of each cluster group, to facilitate firefighting.
<br />Mr. Benson further inquired about the school situation in the Stoneson Development,
<br />as more and more children move into the area. It was stated that in surveys
<br />conducted, it was noticed that not only young married couples, with small children
<br />but older, retired people as well, favored this type of low maintenance housing.
<br />It was Pelt that schooling would not be a severe problem. Mr. 3'ed Fairfield,
<br />the engineers on the project, stated that they had contacted the Murray School
<br />District, who advised them that the two sites had been purchased and have funds
<br />set aside for construction iP necessary. Moreover, the District has posted a
<br />bond election Por $1,500,000, carrying a maximum interest rate at '~,.
<br />Price-wise, the range will be between the low 20's and eventually, into the low
<br />30's. There will be three and Pour-bedroom unite with floor areas running
<br />between 1300 and 1700 sq.ft., However, the Commission was advised that there will
<br />be a few two-bedroom units. The density will be 6.7 units per acre.
<br />Mr. John Dew, 7703 Fairbrook Court, had a question regarding the quality of
<br />home that would be constructed, also the cost of maintenance for the common green
<br />areas. Mr. Friedman replied that the upkeep cost would be $24 per month,
<br />which would include maintenance on the lawn area and the exterior of the units,
<br />along with membership in the cabana club. The codes and covenants oP the
<br />Homeowners Association will be responsible Por this phase of the home purchase.
<br />In total, there will be 252 units in 37 acres, with one additional acre set
<br />aside Por boat and trailer storage.
<br />Mr. Dew had an additional question regarding park dedication. The Planning
<br />Director replied that this item had been satisfied as Par as Stoneson is concerned.
<br />Mr. Jack Gerber, 5074 Lynbrook Court inquired if the proposed townhouse, units will
<br />be the lowest priced three-bedroom home in Pleasanton. Mr. Art Schumacher, of
<br />Stoneson Development Corporation replied to this, stating that the homes are
<br />not an attempt to close the gap to low-cost housing, and that these homes are
<br />by no means falls in the category oP low-cost housing.
<br />Mr. Dick Bache, 5043 Hillcrest Way, asked why Stoneson was changing their original
<br />plan. The reply was that the concept was altered, but that the housing remained
<br />single-Family. Mr. Bache then suggested that the Commissioners continue this item
<br />in order that further publicity could be given to the matter.
<br />-3-
<br />
|