CCMIN060501 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Herder responded that the backyard fencing would be wrought iron open fencing and asked if Ms. Michelotti was referring to fencing between the homes. Ms. Herder indicated that her concero would be for privacy issues of the home owners. There was a break at 9:15 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:21 p.m. Margo Tarver, 1144 Antic Court, objected to the project because she felt there was too much grading. She felt the houses should be built on the side of the hill at least 100 feet down to preserve the viewshed of the area. Colin Proudfoot, 750 Pietronave Lane, said his property was the closest property on the west of the development. The rear of the houses will overlook his property and he requested additional screening oftbe units on Lots 10-16. Steve Brozoski, 1700 Vineyard Avenue, began with comments regarding PUD-06. He was concerned about the maintenance of the landscaping on either side of the loop road around the school. He indicated there are sidewalks proposed around part of the school and wanted them all the way around on both sides of the street. He was also concerned about the day care center being close to the power line and believed it should be relocated. He had some concerns about how his road would connect, but assumed that could be discussed at the tentative map stage. He wanted a better partnership with the School District and felt the City should have been shown its plans before now. He was especially concerned about the impact of drop-offtraffic on his driveway. Ms. Miehelotti indicated there has been cooperation on this process and assured him that the loop road is a very important part of this project. Mr. Brozoski believed that this development is a very good one. He had some concern about moving the power line to the other side of the street because there are heritage trees that he did not want removed. He also wanted to know who would pay the cost of moving the line. With regard to PUD-05, he referred to the map and explained what he thought would be the traffic patterns to the school. He wanted sidewalks on those routes. He was also concerned about parking in the neighborhoods for school events. He objected to the number of houses on the hillside and the necessary grading, especially on Lots 6 and 7. He referred to the road to the Chrisman house and the look of the three foot wall next to the road. He asked if there would be landscaping around it to minimize the view from Vineyard Avenue. Lot 6 is very close to his house and he said the residents could look right into his Jacuzzi and balcony below the canopy of the trees. Ms. Michelotti clarified that the Brozoski property is higher than the new development. Mr. Brozoski said his lot was higher, but one could look below the canopy of the trees at his property. He expressed concern about the grad'mg that goes to his property on the southeast side of the plan. There is a 3:1 slope and he did not want a drop with dirt falling off. He would Pleasanton City Council 11 06/05/01 Minutes