PC 032807 - Laserfiche WebLink

3. Grey Eagle Court is a privately owned street, and the Oak Grove developers would unduly benefit from the improvements paid for by the neighborhood. He noted that the developer declined to attend a recent Homeowners Association meeting, and he was surprised that the City would allow this project to go forward with this deficiency. Mr. Schmidt noted that he and his neighbors were so adamantly opposed to the use of their road that they were prepared to stop it by a number of means, including the possibility of legal action. Lee Fulton, 3407 Brandy Court, noted that he wished to comment on the Oak Grove project and agreed that this park would be a wonderful addition to the City. He expressed concern that some of the visual elements of the project had been grossly misrepresented with respect to the square footage of the houses. He noted that the size of the houses were recommended to be 8,000 square feet; however, it also allowed 800-square-foot garages and 2,000-square-foot accessory structures that could be rented out with different addresses. He noted that this would allow a total of 102 residential units, which would increase the number of people, traffic congestion, and impact on the schools. He was concerned about the visual impact on the ridgelines. He noted that while the photos were reprinted on 11x17 paper, the photos were not that size, which did not add to the clarity and accurate reproduction of the views. Becky Dennis, 838 Gray Fox Circle, noted that she wished to comment on the Oak Grove project and not with regard to Condition 33(a) regarding cattle grazing, she concurred with Ms. Bengtson’s suggestion that grazing not be limited to cattle only and that there had been successful grazing programs including sheep and goats. She thanked the staff, developer, and trails advocates for their attention to protection of the open space. She distributed photos of the trails. Phil Blank noted that he wished to comment on the Oak Grove project and that several years ago, he had opposed this project; at a different Planning Commission meeting, he had called for a moratorium on development. He noted that there had been considerable progress since then and expressed concern about all access on Hearst Drive. He believed it was a good public amenity but did not believe that all access should be via Hearst Drive. He would like to see other potential access points such as Red Feather Court and Grey Eagle Court and acknowledged the financial and other constraints with respect to indemnification agreements. He was concerned about the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which he believed glossed over the vibration issue. He would also not accept the EIR response to airport noise, which he believed was almost insulting. He noted that the noise was detectable on the side of Kottinger Ranch that faced away from the airport. He noted that 50 percent of the noise complaints came from two houses in Pleasanton. He noted there was the possibility of a pilot being required to land following an engine failure in the area, and he did not believe that was properly addressed in the EIR. He did not believe the disclosure statements around the grazing areas, airport, noise, and environment were adequately addressed. He believed there should be a mechanism to be worked out by staff. He noted that he had seen disclosure statements PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 28, 2007 Page 9 of 16