My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01.1
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2007
>
110607
>
01.1
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/1/2007 3:04:01 PM
Creation date
11/1/2007 1:31:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
11/6/2007
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
01.1
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
is most prominent to close end views, there is some visibility from distant views; however, those <br />are difficult to find in the context of existing development. <br />Design guidelines are set up to address high visibility lots in terms of additional tree planting. A <br />condition would limit the house sizes as well as increased setbacks. He presented a view taken <br />from the Ruby Hill area, from Bernal Avenue near Utah Street, from I-680 near the Bernal <br />Interchange looking up at the ridge, looking at Stanley Boulevard at Isabel, and said in many <br />areas there are intervening trees, topography, other structures. <br />The house sizes are capped at 20% FAR, the high visibility lots closest to Grey Eagle would be <br />capped at 9,175 square feet, and there are a few estate lots which would not be visible and <br />allowed to be built up to 12,500 square feet. The overall project would be limited to a 20% FAR, <br />the lots could range from 30,000 to almost 91,000 square feet and houses would range from <br />6,000 to 12,500 square feet. He displayed adjacent developments for comparison. <br />He advised that Kottinger Ranch HOA representatives requested a maximum number of homes <br />be set at 51, which is what the proposal calls for. They would want to make sure public open <br />space is held through a conservation easement by an entity similar to the Tri-Valley <br />Conservancy which is a condition of approval, details of which would be worked at the final map <br />stage. They wish to see the houses sited to minimize the environmental impact and he noted <br />the plan is identified in the EIR as the environmentally superior alternative, avoids many of the <br />significant impacts on biological resources and results in reduced grading, a smaller <br />development footprint, fewer roads, less traffic, less tree removal, and less visibility than the <br />original 98-lot development proposed. <br />The applicant is required through the development agreement to pay $1 million toward a new <br />traffic signal at Bernal and Kottinger, for traffic calming on Hearst Drive and the rest would go <br />into the City's traffic mitigation fee. The traffic calming process will be a separate process and <br />would be worked out after the project is approved with the neighbors to indicate what they would <br />like to see to mitigate and calm traffic on Hearst Drive. The HOA felt the project should provide <br />a trail staging area which is being provided at the end of the southerly edge of the site, with 11 <br />parking spaces, room for a horse trailer, restrooms, a drinking fountain and horse trough. <br />The HOA wants to see a crossing guard provided at Hearst Drive and Concord Street during <br />construction. They do not have this currently in the development agreement, but this would be <br />something the Council could direct staff to add to the development agreement. The HOA <br />wanted to ensure a functional fire access road is provided, and there will be two in addition to <br />Hearst Drive; one extending out to Court 5 to Grey Fox and the other out to the water tank and <br />ultimately to Benedict Court. The City's Trails Master Plan wanted to see a regional trail <br />provided that could be part of a trail system that would link Callippe Preserve to the Shadow <br />Cliffs area and this is indicated on the plan. <br />Other issues had to do with the traffic signal that would be proposed at the intersection of Bernal <br />and Kottinger Drive. There would also be signal timing at Bernal and Independence, funded by <br />the developer, it would not actually be installed with the project until signal warrants are met and <br />there was a need for it, which could be a number of years in the future. However, at any time, <br />the City could install this signal, as necessary. <br />Regarding second units and traffic impacts, they are allowed by State law but staff typically finds <br />that with these kinds of custom home developments, second units are rare. Sometimes they are <br />built as a separate unit for kids or for use as a pool house or other recreational activities, but <br />through the EIR, the traffic analysis was based on 98 units and not re-done for the 51 unit <br />City Council Minutes 4 October 2, 2007 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.