Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember Sullivan said that the spacing of these lights as shown on drawings seems <br />abnormally close together. Mr. Kelcourse explained that it is the original design and noted that <br />while streetlights further north on Foothill Road are on alternating sides of the street, these are <br />all placed on one side. <br />Councilmember Sullivan said that the southern end of Foothill Road seems to be less lit than is <br />being suggested here. Mr. Kelcourse said that this was designed using the standards imposed <br />at the time; lighting on Foothill Road has been installed in different segments as development <br />mandates. <br />Councilmember Sullivan reiterated that it seems as though the lights are spaced closer than one <br />would normally find in a typical residential suburban tract neighborhood and seems excessive. <br />Mr. Kelcourse suggested that the graphic is deceptive and clarified that the lights are spaced <br />roughly 150 to 200 feet apart. <br />Steve DeCoite said he lives in the very last house on this segment of Foothill Road, said he was <br />not aware of this matter until today and wanted to go on record as opposing the reinstallation. <br />He then clarified that he has no issue with the lighting but would agree with his neighbor in <br />asking that the last three lights be eliminated. <br />Fluge Schoendienst said the entire matter originated with one resident back in 1990, Mr. John <br />Ennist, who lived in one of the four cul-de-sacs adjacent to Golden Eagle and who disliked the <br />lighting. He argued that, contrary to what was stated this evening, many of the residents at that <br />time were not opposed to the lighting and were unaware of any opposition until after the City <br />Council voted on the matter. He said it was a bad decision at that time; in light of the <br />neighborhood's growth and subsequent installation of sidewalks, curbs, storm drains, turn lanes, <br />and stop signs that detract from a rural environment, reinstalling these lights for the safety of <br />everyone using Foothill Road is the only responsible thing to do. <br />Randy Ochs expressed support for reinstallation of the lighting. He concurred with Mr. <br />Schoendienst regarding the efforts of Mr. Ennist and doubted that any other neighborhood in <br />Pleasanton would succumb to the pressures of one homeowner. He acknowledged the <br />comments of his neighbors who would like to maintain a rural feel and said that eliminating the <br />last three lights seems like a reasonable solution. He noted the area's growth and progress over <br />the last twenty years and argued that to selectively desire to keep an area rural while taking <br />advantage of growth and progress made little sense. <br />Mayor Hosterman closed public comment. <br />Councilmember McGovern said she holds no issue with forgoing installation of the last three <br />lights. She concurred with Councilmember Sullivan that drawings depict light fixtures that are <br />much more closely spaced than anything seen in other areas of the community. <br />Mr. Kelcourse reiterated that he believes it to be a misrepresentation and that site visits have <br />shown the bases to be 150' to 200' apart. He noted that depending on the height of a fixture, <br />spacing can be as low as 50' apart and that these lights, even when installed, will still be rural in <br />nature when compared with other lighting throughout the City. <br />Councilmember McGovern asked if the use of LEDs would affect the spacing. Mr. Kelcourse <br />confirmed that it would, and he explained that to do so would add a design phase to the project <br />in order to determine luminescence and ensure that the same IES standards are met. <br />City Council Minutes Page 6 of 17 April 7, 2009 <br />