CCMIN031991 - Laserfiche WebLink

81 Mr. Frank Lehne, 5466 Foothill Road, a neighbor of the Mollers, congratulated the applicants for a good job at mitigating the concerns and problems brought up by the neighbors. Mr. Frank Neu, a neighbor of the Mollers, indicated that he was in favor of the development. Mr. Manny Joel, 5470 Foothill Road, another neighbor of the Mollers, stated that the Mollers were very receptive to the concerns of the neighbors and that the project would be a wonderful addition to Pleasanton. Ms. Marty Greist, 5470 Foothill Road, indicated her support for the project. She stated that the Mollers went out of their way to contact the neighbors and discuss their concerns and added that the townhouses would enhance the quarry trails. She requested that the limitations on the use of stucco on the townhouses be modified since this would blend well with the terrain and the oak hills. Mr. David Glenn, 6650 Foothill Road, a neighbor of the Mollers, commended the project for developing only 18% of the site and using the quarry site for the townhouses. He stated that the Mollers have been very cooperative in mitigating the problems regarding the easement he shares on the Moller property. Ms. Becky Dennis, 838 Gray Fox Circle, representing the Board of Directors of Preserve Area Ridgelands Committee (PARC), stated that the project's design was good but that the certification of a Negative Declaration for the project would not be in the best public interest and would not be appropriate unless it included more complete information. She expressed concern about the issues of toxics on the site as well as potential seismic, geologic and biotic impacts, particularly in connection with Condition No. 56, which requires an analysis of the feasibility of extending "C" Court northerly to the adjacent Laurel Creek project to accommodate future traffic which might result from development in the Ridgelands, and with the building of an over-crossing on Gold Creek to accommodate an overland water route which would avoid a seismic hazard. She continued that none of responding agencies recommended certification of Moller Negative Declaration or that the Negative Declaration contained sufficient information for them to make the required findings. Additionally, all the agencies indicated that the information referenced in the Negative Declaration was not included for their review. She indicated that both the Department of Fish and Game and the Department of Conservation felt that a full EIR is warranted, that a recirculated Negative Declaration with more complete environmental information is the minimum acceptable standard under CEQA, and that the CEQA guidelines do not permit the use of future studies as mitigation measures unless they - 11 - 3-19-91