CCMIN091592 - Laserfiche WebLink

50 Frank Belecky, 892 Madeira Drive, explained that it bothers him that the Planning Commission approved this project with all of the concerns that were voiced by the residents. He stated the traffic in this area was difficult for the residents and the City was unable to control the traffic. The staff addressed this problem but was unsuccessful because a private street cannot be blocked. He asked~that the ~uilder and developer be responsible for all of the traffic if this project was approved. He agreed with Mr. Ebright that if this were the only golf course that was to be built in Pleasanton then he would not recommend it. Rip Benson, Vice President of the Kottinger Homeowners Association, recommended that a dedicated access to the golf course should be from Vineyard; no public access to Hearst Drive from the golf course parking lot; understand the need for continuity between the Kottinger Hills homes and the golf course; and card key access through a gate separating Hearst and the golf course would be a viable approach. He agreed that this development proposed a measurable and absolute threat to the community from the increased quantities and type of traffic that the project would generate on Hearst Drive. (A handout was given to Council). The handout included calculations of traffic figures. He believed that there were some inconsistencies in the EIR. He explained the difference in figures of traffic generated. He was also concerned that the golfers would be leaving the course after consuming alcohol. Mr. Benson believed that the following conditions should be part of the approval process if Council wished to include a golf course in the plan: 1) 98 homes; 2) dedicated access to the course from Vineyard; 3) no public golf access from Hearst; and 4) gated access to Kottinger Hills homes between Hearst and the homes of the golf course. Bruce Tichinin, 17775 Monterey Street, Morgan Hill, Attorney for Kottinger Ranch Homeowners Association, explained that he was not aware of anything that was presented to Council that constituted the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, Monitoring Program for implementation of the mitigation measures for the project, which are required to be adopted at the time that the statement of overriding considerations was adopted, if the project was approved. He believed that it was necessary to await the preparation of such a program before any approval was given to this project. He disagreed with the EIR which concluded that traffic is not a potential significant effect in this project. He referred to the same figures that Mr. Benson presented to Council in the form of a handout. He believed that the proper approach to this matter would be to downsize the project to a fail-safe level. He said that Council could not violate the General Plan by balancing the benefits of the project but the General Plan could be amended under certain conditions. A mitigation measure would be needed to assure that as the project is built and occupied it doesn't exceed the 3,000 ADT with a provision that there would be 9/15/92 24