11 ATTACHMENT 8 - Laserfiche WebLink

Bing Hadley, 1210 Hearst Drive, President of the Kottinger Ranch Homeowners Association, noted that he wished to comment on the Oak Grove project and believed that this plan represented significant effort on the part of the City, developer, and homeowners. He believed it represented significant and meaningful compromise that impacted the adjacent neighborhoods as little as possible. He supported the open space gained by the City. He would like to ensure that there was a conservation easement held by a third party that ensured the land would remain open space. He would not want to see further road extensions and tie-ins and would like the project to become the end of the line at the urban growth boundary. He wished to ensure that the City had no intention of exercising eminent domain to overturn that at a future point. He did not believe that would be the case, but wanted that to be memorialized. He supported public access to the open space, which was an important part of the project; he supported an 11-space parking lot with restrooms, water, and a horse trough. He would like to see a meaningful plan put in place to avoid the area being used as an after-hours hangout. He had originally been against public access to open space but was persuaded by Ms. Dolores Bengtson that the use of lighting, timed sprinklers, and law enforcement presence would make the area less attractive to loiterers. He noted that emergency vehicle access was an important part of the project; he favored a circular route. He noted that the developer had put funding for traffic mitigation and traffic lights at Kottinger Drive and Bernal Avenue and wanted to keep that in the program. Mary Roberts, 1666 Vineyard Avenue, noted that she wished to comment on the Oak Grove project and that as she read through the staff report, she was upset about the open space conservation district because it was worded differently in different parts of the document. She noted that page 45 of the staff report stated that the owners would dedicate nearly 500 acres of open space to the City or other public entity such as a Geologic Hazard Assessment District (GHAD), which had the City Council acting as the Board of Directors. She believed a third party should hold that post and that a political body should not hold a conservation easement. She noted that the Councilmembers would change over time and that there was a lot of pressure on Councils and Commissions by the State and public interest groups to provide more housing or a different kind of park setting, and cited the initiative put forth by Brian Arkin and Steve Brozosky to limit housing on the Bernal property. She noted that No. 69 on page 26 stated that "the open space area shall be subject to an open space easement and shall be in accordance with the requirements of the development agreement." She noted that the development agreement stated that the open space would be given to "an entity reasonably acceptable to the City to protect the open space as permanent open space." She noted that the phrase "reasonably acceptable to the City" bothered her as well. She noted that the findings stated that the "conservation easement will be granted to the Tri- Valley Conservancy, providing second-party inspection and oversight of the open space area," which she believed was the most secure guarantee possible. She noted that the overriding considerations addressed the oak woodlands and noted that she attended an oak woodlands planner workshop that had been held in Livermore on Thursday, March 21, 2007. She noted there was considerable discussion about planting shrubs above a certain height below the oaks, which would kill the oaks. EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 28, 2007 Page 2 of 6