CCMIN031505 - Laserfiche WebLink

of the pedestrian path connecting Sycamore Terrace to San Carlos Way be removed from the Specific Plan. Peter MacDonald, representing Mr. and Mm. Bozorgzad, believed this particular location presented a soume of continuous, serious liability problems and that it would be unconscionable to pass that liability and maintenance responsibilities to the bystander properties. He noted that there was nothing in the environmental impact report addressing the mitigations for a severely sloped pedestrian trail. He believed an environmental analysis needed to be conducted and mitigations developed so that there is not a series of serious injuries and impacts. The developers are refbsing to protect the Bozorgzads' privacy from the pedestrian trail. The developer's opposition is based on staff's recommendation that the Bozorgzads should pay to protect their own privacy. The Bozorgzads are requesting a six-foot solid wall to protect their privacy; this requires that the trail be moved over by three-feet and that a City water line be relocated. The Bozorgzads were fair with the Bachs when they developed their property. The Bozorgzads spent $280,000 to construct Sycamore Terrace and were reimbursed $20,000 from the Bachs and $27,000 from the City. He noted that there were separate settlement agreements between Greenbriar Homes, the Bozorgzads and the Bachs, which were based exclusively on compensation for the Sycamore Creek right-of-way. After receiving several requests from the Bachs, the Bozorgzads also put in three- fourths of the right-of-way that was necessary for Sycamore Terrace. He pointed out that Council had the option to require the Bachs to reimburse the Bozorgzads for one-half of the cost to construct Sycamore Terrace. Council also has the option to require the developer to implement a simple program protecting the Bozorgzads' privacy. William Conaway, a San Juan Way resident, addressed Council in favor of retaining the public trail connection between San Carlos Way and Sycamore Terrace Road as mentioned in the Specific Plan. He noted that it is Council's job to balance the needs of the community against the needs of the few. A sidewalk connection provides a critical infrastructure linkage between the neighborhoods to the north of the subject property to the public trail by Sycamore Creek. He appreciated the desire to preserve privacy; however, noted that members of the community all have to deal with public access and thoroughfares on streets, sidewalks and privacy issues in their neighborhoods. He noted that the Americans With Disabilities Act is based on principals of reasonable accommodation and undue hardship and it was never meant to exclude access to the public at-large simply because something could not be made ADA compliant for reasonable costs. He urged Council to retain the sidewalk and promote the integration between the neighborhoods. Jack Keane, a Pleasanton resident, said he lived directly across the street from the proposed development. He expressed concern about police monitoring of the proposed sidewalk. He pointed out that there are two access paths serving the North Sycamore area and added that this path will not be ADA-compliant or bike-friendly. He believed that Council should consider the needs of those neighbors who live closest to the sidewalk, as they will be the most impacted by this issue. At the Planning Commission meeting, most of the adjacent neighbors to the sidewalk objected to it. He urged Council to support the Planning Commission's recommendation to remove the sidewalk. Dolores Bengston, a Pleasanton resident, said the approved North Sycamore Specific Plan considered the need for pedestrian connections between the Pleasanton City Council 6 03/15/05 Minutes