My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
AGENDA FULL PACKET
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2020 - PRESENT
>
2025
>
01-22
>
AGENDA FULL PACKET
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/23/2025 9:48:41 AM
Creation date
1/23/2025 9:44:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
1/22/2025
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
240
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
3001 Bishop Drive, #100 <br />San Ramon, CA 94583 <br />City of Pleasanton – Community Development Dept. <br />Attn: Emily Carroll, Assocaite Planner <br />PO Box 520, Pleasanton CA 94566 <br />RE: Narritive for General Plan Amendment Application <br />1 Vineyard Ave. Pleasanton CA. 94566 <br /> APN: 946-4691-001 <br />General Plan Amendment Request Narritive <br />Background <br /> In April 2024 Trumark conducted a neighborhood meeting in Pleasanton at Ruby Hills Golf & Country Club to <br />introduce a 27 unit residential project consisting of all market rate single family detached homes. <br />Approximately a dozen or so neighbors attended the meeeting, and in general they were supportive of the <br />project as presented. One or two neighbors voiced concern regarding the location of the proposed <br />openspace/park area fronting onto Vineyard Avenue. One neighbor who spoke up pointed out his concern was <br />traffic speeds on Vineyard Avenue and having a park adjecent to the busy roadway. We explained to the <br />neighbor that within the City’s recently adopted General Plan Housing Element the location of the future <br />project’s park location was clearly identified and did not provide the flexibility to relocate the park to another <br />location onsite. Other than the concern regarding the park location no opposition was voiced regarding the <br />project. To our pleasure a significant amount of support was shared by the neighbors who attended the meeting. <br />In May of 2024 Trumark submitted an preliminary for the 1 Vineyard Ave. project site and in June of 2024 the City <br />provided comments regarding the project. In July Trumark submittaled a SB330 Pre-APplciation, follow by a <br />formal SB330 Tentative Map application in September of 2024. The formal Tentative Map applciation was <br />submitted to the City for the 27 lot project which included a three (3) acre park fronting onto Vineayrd Avenue as <br />required in the City’s General Plan Land Use and Housing Elements. Prior to making the formal Tentative Map <br />applciation for this project, the neighbor who spoke up in the neighborhood meeting regarding the park location <br />as well as a City Council Member contacted Trumark Homes related to the park location. Over the passind <br />weeks the discussion regarding the park location expanded beyound the neighbor and Council Member to <br />involve City Development Department Staff and various additional City Departments. These discussions <br />regarding the park location drove Trumark to the decision to satify the neighbor as well as the City of <br />Pleasanton’s concerns. City staff agreed that a General Plan Amendment is needed to make this change. <br />Description of Request <br />Trumark has developed an alternative preliminary site plan that includes 27 single family detached homes with a <br />dual park design that cumulatively has three (3) acres of park/openspace land. The intent of the design is to <br />provide a landscaped buffer between the proposed homes and Vineyard Ave. as well as an activitated park area <br />fronting Old Vineyard Ave. which is the furthest onsite location from Vineyard Ave.. The landscape buffer area <br />(fronting on Vineyard Ave.) will maintain a consistent appearance with the adjacent neighborhood(s), while the <br />park area at the rear of the site (fronting on Old Vineyard Rd.) will act as an active use area far from the traffic <br />concerns from Vineyard Ave. The openspace/park area requirement for three (3) acres onsite will remain the <br />same. The main difference between the original requirement and the proposed amendment is the ability to <br />satisfy the park requirement in multiple locations within the 10.64 acre site. This dual park design will still meet <br />EXHIBIT B
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.