01.1 - Laserfiche WebLink

when he got a copy of the EIR that stated an EVA was on his property. He came to the Planning Commission, there was no agreement on his part to have this on his property, people discussed eminent domain, they indicated they would use the existing city easement which he pointed out on the map and although it was too steep at 20 feet, the rules had been changed from 15 to 20 feet to address this. He felt the process was very difficult for him, but the City Manager was willing to have continued dialogue with him. He said the EVA issue has been resolved and it is to be used for fire vehicles only. It will be gated and fenced to prevent vehicles from coming back out that way, it is not paved and will be landscaped to make it unappealing for any vehicles to exit, and this addresses issues on Grave Court which are way too narrow to have fire trucks and hundreds of cars streaming down through his property in the case of an emergency. He said the EIR talks about the distance from trees and shrubs from the roof, fence and windows as two times the plant height. If one follows that rule, none of the trees would be able to exist because they violate this and there were a lot more than 57 trees that would be removed. Regarding height, structures are allowed to be 44 feet tall in this proposal and this is different than any other house in Pleasanton. All others are allowed to be 30 feet, which is very different. Regarding screening, a tree must be 60 feet away, it is down slope and the best it can screen is the very bottom of the house. Mike Brown said he lives in the last house on the left at the Hearst Drive cul-de-sac, he reviewed the grading plan which he felt was deceptive, he walked the lot himself and even with the new Lot 2 being removed the development will severely impact the beautiful ridgeline he has behind his house. He was told the ridgeline was sacred and that no one would ever be able to build on it. Lot 2 is actually about 40 degrees from his deck, it is a significant impact on the ridgeline and he asked for consideration to have this moved somewhere else. Regarding one- way in and one-way out access road, he referred to the small fire last year where many people from all over drove up Hearst Drive to find out what was going on. He said driveways 10 houses down from the cul-de-sac were blocked by people who didn't even live in the neighborhood, he felt there would definitely be a fire in the future, having one way in and out would create a huge danger to those who live there and asked for a second access road out of the development other than Hearst Drive. Deborah Wahl said her comments are from a trails perspective, Oak Grove will result in 497 acres of open space that will be trail-accessible, a trail staging area will be provided as well as trails, it will provide spectacular views, it will be able to link this space with the planned regional trail to Veneer Avenue and the existing Shadow Cliff Park. Oak Grove is a unique land grant, she noted that open space costs money, she believes the compromise meets open space, trails and development concerns, that over 71.5% of residents polled supported the development, and she asked for its approval. Lou Astbury opposed to the project in its current form, said the Kottinger Ranch HOA Board has never taken a vote for or against the project, they have been depicted of a small splinter group of potential tree sitters on a Don Quixote quest; however, as an idealist he agrees with Councilmember McGovern that the southeast hills ridge land area should be treated the same as the Pleasanton Ridge. Measure F restricted where development could occur on the ridge. We need to have the same safeguards for all of the Pleasanton ridges including the southeast hills and felt they were too important for the community and future generations. He echoed Allen Roberts' comments about visual impacts, felt the presentations made tonight of the homes reflected a likely size, but he wanted to see their actual potential size rather than a likely size. He voiced concerns regarding public safety and echoed Megan Williams' comments. He felt the staging area and trails should be within a 5-minute fire response time, said the General Plan Program 22 requires developers to pay for the police safety improvements required of new developments and this development should require additional police enforcement to secure the area due to future nuisances. He felt there was also a community character element that needs City Council Minutes 13 October 2, 2007