CCMIN051281 - Laserfiche WebLink

Fairfield stated the original 111 conditions for approval had been negotiated and worked out with staff and Planning Commission, and that now there are 80 conditions; to which Mr. Fromm is agreeable. He stated he would like to change Condition No. 24 - That there shall be no buildings on the subject property over five stories or 65 ft. in height at the parapet, to read as follows: "That there shall be no buildings on . the subject property over three stores or 40 ft. in heiBht at the parabet". Mr. Fair- field advised that the Valley Avenue extension and signalization will be built with the first phase of the project; that the streets will be public but maintained by the project; and that there will be maintenance and landscaping, security, and fire pre- vention provided by the project. Mr. Fairfield requested approval of this quality project. The following persons spoke in opposition to this item: Mr. Anthony Delucci, representing City of San Francisco Water Department who owns eight acres adjacent to the proposed development, stated he did not oppose the development but opposed the location of the Valley Avenue extension. He advised that the City of San Francisco has four wells on their acreage in this area, and one thac is in continuous use which is located in the median of the proposed street. He stated this well provides the water supply to Castlewood. Mr. Delucci stated he would like to see the street located on the Fairgrounds property so.that there will not be any disruption of water supply to Castlewood. He advised he had previously made comments to the Environmental Impact Report. He reiterated that he has no objections to the project but feels that the adverse impact on a possible water disruption would cause serious problems. Mr. Tandy Carter, manager of the Alameda Division of the San Francisco Water Department, stated that of the four wells in question he is most concerned with the one in the median strip. He advised that this particular well is used by Castle- wood continuously and that the other are used for irrigation intermittantly. In answer to questions from Council, he indicated that Castlewood could use a different well. Mr. Paul Ebright, 5416 Blackbird Drive, stated he opposed the Fromm project for basically the same reasons he opposed the Meyer project; the adverse impacts on the environment are significant. He stated he felt three stories is the maximum height that should be allowed for buildings in Pleasanton, that that traffic will impact the quality of air. Mr. Gary Johansen, 6588 Calle Altamira, stated he felt there has been no pro- tection provided for the homeowners that live along the creek while the project is being constructed and also later on. He felt the Environmental Impact Report does not address the problems of air pollution, traffic, impact on the police department, children getting to school safely, security guards (usually not adequately trained), impact on downtown traffic, construction noise and dirt, possible uses such as ware- houses and their contents. He stated he felt a fence should be built along back of the property to protect the adjacent property owners. Mr. Johansen stated he agreed with the three story limitation of building height but did not feel it should be 40 feet. He stated the staff report advised that there would be no noise from the border line of the property and he felt this was incorrect. Mr. Johansen stated he felt these concerns should be addressed at this time and that safeguards should be set forth before the project is started. The City Attorney advised that safe- guards such as these are discussed and decided upon at the time of design review.. He explained the tentative map approval process.- 4. 5/lz/sz