My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA PACKET
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2025
>
120225 REGULAR
>
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA PACKET
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/26/2025 2:05:09 PM
Creation date
12/26/2025 2:03:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
12/2/2025
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
200
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
Page 4 of 6 <br />the controlling policy language of the VACSP and the General Plan, respectively, prohibits or <br />discourages the installation of gates. Therefore, modifications to both documents would be <br />required to allow the gate. <br /> <br />General Plan, Specific Plan, and Zoning <br />The proposed project is inconsistent with the following General Plan Policies: <br />• Circulation Element Program 7.4: Calls for the City to “discourage new gated <br />communities.” <br />• Community Character Element 17.1: Calls for “neighborhoods [to be] open and <br />accessible to one another.” <br /> <br />Although the General Plan discourages gated communities, numerous gated private streets <br />and communities exist throughout Pleasanton. Some gates may have originally been <br />agricultural gates, gates installed before a property was annexed into the City, or gates may <br />have been approved prior to or despite the General Plan program. One such gate is at the <br />base of Silver Oaks Terrace, within one mile of the subject area. Ruby Hill is another gated <br />community off of Vineyard Avenue, and recently, the Merritt project, an age-restricted <br />community, was approved with a gate. <br /> <br />Vineyard Avenue Corridor Specific Plan. <br />The proposed project is inconsistent with the following VACSP programs and design <br />requirements: <br />• Program 5.3: Discourage the development of further gated communities which inhibit <br />the sense of greater community and make City utility and emergency services more <br />difficult to provide. <br />• Circulation Plan V(E)(6): Gated developments which preclude public access shall not be <br />permitted unless required for agricultural protection purposes. <br /> <br />To permit the installation of a gate at this location, staff recommends amending Circulation <br />Plan V(E)(6) (page 63 of the VACSP) to read as follows: <br /> <br />Gates, or gated developments, which preclude public access should not be permitted on <br />private streets unless required for agricultural protection purposes there are unusual <br />circumstances justifying the installation of a gate, as determined by the Community and <br />Economic Development Director or their designee. <br /> <br />In addition to providing guidance on processing requests for gates, or gated developments, the <br />proposed language would also be consistent with the General Plan. <br /> <br />Winding Oaks Drive is a private street, serving a limited number of properties and with no <br />through connection that would be impeded by its installation. These conditions and the recent <br />break-in attempts could be considered an “unusual circumstance” that justifies the installation <br />of a gate. <br /> <br /> <br />Page 15 of 200
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.