PC 062707 - Laserfiche WebLink

road. She noted that in the Vineyard Avenue Corridor Specific Plan regarding the tank property, the EVA was supposed to go over the hill to Berlogar’s. Because of the steepness of the road, the developers and the Fire Department wanted a different alternative. Part of the EVA went up her driveway and noted that large fire trucks could navigate her driveway. Melanie Bentley, 23 Grey Eagle Court, noted that she had never been a “no-growther” and generally liked Pleasanton’s posture as a City of Planned Progress. She believed this project because she believed it could be done well and asked the Commission to continue to listen to the community’s concerns. Mr. Inderbitzen noted that this project has been largely an attempt to understand what the community at large would benefit from, and how they could provide it in a way that minimized impacts as much as possible on the surrounding community. He noted that they ended up with 496 acres of publicly accessible open space and that they would build trails that would be available to the community at large. They also provided an end to development in that portion of the community and a beginning for several thousand acres of open space as a part of the community, which would be free of charge to the community. He noted that they had to make compromises on the immediately adjacent neighborhoods to meet that goal, and in order to minimize the impacts, they elected to stay out of the drainages, out of the trees, away from the biological impacts, and restricted the development as much as possible to preserve the maximum open space component for perpetuity. They were aware that the visual impact would be the most significant impact to deal with. He emphasized that this was a lot project, not a home project; they did not propose to build a single home with this application. He noted that compliance with strict design guidelines was required before a single house could be built and that multiple approvals must occur before any single house could be built. He noted that the City controlled the visual analysis because otherwise, every resident in every adjacent neighborhood could do their own photo analysis without the rigors imposed on the City to ensure they were standardized. He noted that the only truly valid visual analysis for this project that complied with the CEQA requirements was the one done for the CEQA study by the City’s consultant. With regard to the EVA, Mr. Inderbitzen noted that the access to the property line for this project currently exists and is owned by the City; the City already had the right to use it independent of this project. He emphasized that they did not want to be inside Grey Eagle Estates, doing anything to the existing City-owned easements. He believed that the City has gone to great lengths to assure Grey Eagle Estates residents that they would not go into the neighborhood and remodel the EVA. They believed that it met their requirements, and that it was adequate to provide service to this property. He noted that there were already access situations for public safety through private developments in Pleasanton, such as Golden Eagle Farm. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 27, 2007 Page 22 of 28