01a - Laserfiche WebLink

develop their land, not about undermining the compromises that have been accomplished, but one of fairness to all parties affected by the development. She said the Oak Grove home size provisions allow houses of up to 12,500 square feet, said the majority of estate lots seem to be situated on the ridge overlooking the Grey Eagle neighborhood, the visual square footage overshadows the size of other homes in the area, felt they would be an immense impact on the ridgeline, asked that compromises reached be continued to address this concern and urged the Council not to approve the plan. Diane Offutt, CSHA Trail Chair, said on behalf of equestrians and trail users they appreciate what has been done and asked the Council to move forward with the project. David J. Orozco commended on the Council and developers' efforts, felt the community would benefit greatly from the project and hoped for its approval. Pam Grove confirmed her letter had been received by the Council and said the people in Grey Eagle were not included in any survey, focus group or interview. The homeowners' association presentation was very recent and the plan was complete and she felt there had been no compromise with Grey Eagle neighbors. They are significantly affected by the project, suggested the developer propose a safe and adequate EVA, felt the view impact was significant, felt the trees planted would not shield homes and asked for a second entrance. Pat Griffin asked that the traffic light at the corner of Bernal and Kottinger not be installed because it would change the character of their neighborhood and it would create faster vehicular traffic. Dick Guigley said as a trail advocate, he felt the project was a good community project, and that the project provides a link of regional trail connectors, provides the community an open space park, urged the Council to approve the project, certify the EIR and endeavor to complete the Pleasanton Ridge South Regional plan which would open up opportunities for education and healthy nature hikes. Michelle LaMarche said she was disappointed with the word "compromise" and viewed it more as a "settlement', said she was part of all meetings, one of which was very contentious with little endorsement, felt many of the documents produced by the applicant were marketing materials endorsing the project, she felt the public was not aware of the casitas, cabanas, mother-in-law units associated with the project, felt the square footage of the homes was massive and out of character and she felt 650 traffic trips per day would cause a significant impact. Mary Roberts said she could not understand why an EIR, PUD, a development agreement was packaged together for approval, noted the EIR was properly appealed to the City Council but felt this did not mean the PUD should also be dealt with and suggested it return to the Planning Commission. She thanked Mr. Roush for correcting items in the development agreement, still had concerns with the requirement for the agreement, and said she had trouble accessing the on-line PDF file which was 375 pages. Steve Brozosky echoed comments of Ms. Roberts, voiced concerns about the need for the development agreement and asked that if the Council approved the EIR they ask for the PUD to return to the Planning Commission in order to continue where they left off. City Council Minutes 13 September 4, 2007