My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN040682
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1982
>
CCMIN040682
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:52:11 AM
Creation date
11/10/1999 1:02:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
491 <br /> <br /> stated his client feels he has met the objections that were raised by Council- <br /> members, and re respectfully requested approval of this application. He requested <br /> that a decision be made at this meeting in order to be eligible for the Growth <br /> Management Plan. <br /> <br /> After variQus questions, Mr. Warnick advised it appears that the streets in <br /> this development are very similar to any other public streets and he could see no <br /> significant reason why they could not be public streets, therefore Conditions Nos. <br /> 33, 37, and 38 could be eliminated. <br /> <br /> The following persons spoke in opposition to this application and negative <br /> declaration. <br /> <br /> Ms. Nancy Storch, 3193 Chardonnay Drive, representing residents that live in <br /> the northern area of Vintage Hills, stated this group had met several times with <br /> Mr. Parish and Mr. Hirst about the project, and the residents appreciate some of <br /> the changes but there are still many concerns. She read a letter to the Council <br /> listing these concerns as follows: <br /> <br />1. Although designed to be attractive to families with childrem, are are major <br /> problems. <br /> <br /> a. The development itself does not include adequate open space and the <br /> closest park is over a mile away. <br /> b. Sidewalks are on only one side of the street. Small children will have <br /> to cross the street to ride tricycles and to roller skate. <br /> c. All schools are one to two miles away, and the busy major streets of <br /> Vineyard and/or Pico will have to be crossed. <br /> d. Neighbors don't want any more children playing in the streets by their <br /> houses. We already have a hazardous situation. <br /> <br />2. There is a good chance that after the developer is gone, the general mainte- <br /> nance and appearance of the project will decline to set it apart from the rest <br /> of the community. We believe that the causes will be: <br /> <br /> a. Higher than average ownership turnover. <br /> b. High numbers of rental units. <br /> c. Maintenance left up to resident's discretion. <br /> <br /> Ms. Storch stated the residents would like to see approval of this project con- <br />ditioned on: <br /> <br />1. 60% of the units to be set aside for senior citizens, or an additional one <br /> acre play area be added to the community area (at an approximate cost of <br /> $250/unit) and sidewalks be provided on both sides of the streets. <br /> <br />2. Some long-term guarantees for continued house and yard maintenance. <br /> <br />3. City park and recreation fees derived from this and other projects in the <br /> North Vintage Hills area be set aside to be used to fund a park in this area <br /> to serve the needs of future and current residents. <br /> <br /> Ms. Storch advised there are seven other parks on the priority list ahead of <br />the Vintage Hills park for development. <br /> <br /> 4. 4/6/82 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.