CCMIN082879 - Laserfiche WebLink

Corporation consents to locating a BART station on their 88 acres at this time. The following persons spoke in opposition to this application: Mr. Bill Christianson, 7979 Hillsboro Court, representing Stoneridge Homeowners Association, presented a petition, signed by 339 residents, which read as follows: "The undersigned residents of Pleasanton, on behalf of other simiarly situated resi- dents, hereby respectfully submit this petition. Recent actions taken by the Pleasanton Planning Commission regarding lands in and about the regional shopping center as designated on the General Plan and Zoning Map are before you now for your consideration and action. If these recommendations of the Planning Commission are approved by the City Council, the quality, well-being and safety of our neighborhood will be jeopardized. We, the undersigned, therefore petition the City Council of the City of Pleasanton not to act on these matters until a full environmentaI impact report, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, is prepared and sub- mitted for review along with other necessary studies. The preparation of said studies and reports should involve a representative group of residents of the Stoneridge Tract, the regional shopping center developer, and members of the City staff. When many of us purchased our homes in the area, we were assured that there would not be any retail commercial of any type along Stoneridge Drive, one of the main entrances to our residential subdivision. Current zoning of the subject pro- perties does not prohibit development of the land in terms of office - light com- mercial use". Mr. Christainson stated this group was not opposed to the Shopping Center but had some concerns as a result of this issue. He stated his group felt they had not been given adequate time at the Planning Commission meeting for their presentation, that the Planning Commission hearing focused around BART, and that the land use issue had not been focused on clearly. Mr. Christainson stated the Stoneridge Homeowners Association felt the mitigated Environmental Impact Report was up~cceptable; to revert the 23 acres to commercial use would adversely impact traffic, air quality, and safety. He stated another area of concern was the peripheral property being used for commercial other than offices as previously proposed. Mr. Christainson stated they were very concerned about the type of development on Stoneridge Drive, parking, and increased traffic. He stated he felt there should be additional studies made before any decision is taken on this item, and that there should be stiffer guidelines. Mr. Yvan Albert, 7926 Hillsboro Court, stated he was opposed to C-R zoning other than office. He reviewed the staff report and disagreed with various'items that were classified insignificant impacts which he felt were significant; i.e., air quality, broad range of land uses, public services, aesthetics, and short and long term impacts on human beings. He stated he felt a full Environmental Impact Report should be required. Mr. Carl Marsh, 7915 Hillsboro Court, stated he did not think either of the proposed BART lines were good in the Shopping Center and that it should be re- located to run along the highway. He expressed concern about traffic and aesthe- tics. He stated he felt that Sonteridge Drive should be restricted to Office zoning, that no parking be allowed on the Stoneridge Drive side but be restricted to the rear, and that the area be heavily landscaped. Mr. Avner Naggar rebutted the concerns of the opponents stating that an En- vironmental Impact Report had been prepared as required at the time, that they had cooperated with BART for a more logical line, that they had complied with the CC&R's, and that they would not allow any development that might jeopardize the Shopping Center. He stated the City had controls that would not permit any unde- sirable land uses. He stated that Caltrans had designed and approved the inter- change. Mr. Naggar stated that the Shopping Center was planned to be as nearly perfect as possible and that the BART route had been proposed as the best location within the development. 10. 8/28/79