Planning Commission Agenda Packet 102225 (1)

P25-0294 and PUD-54-01M, Winding Oaks Drive Planning Commission 4 of 6 Proposed Project The applicant proposes installing a security gate at the base of the private street, Winding Oaks Drive. The applicants submitted their application on April 24, 2025, citing concerns about safety and requesting a security gate to create “a controlled access point that not only deters unwanted visitors, but allows our residents to feel safe and secure in their environment.” On July 28, 2025, two homes on Winding Oaks Drive experienced attempted break-ins. The applicant reports that no one was harmed, no homes were entered, and the Pleasanton Police Department (PPD) responded quickly. ANALYSIS Given the recent break-ins, staff and the PPD are sympathetic to the concerns of the Winding Oaks homeowners and request to install a gate. However, as described below, the controlling policy language of the VACSP and the General Plan respectively prohibit or discourage the installation of gates. Therefore, modifications to both documents would be required to allow the gate. General Plan, Specific Plan, and Zoning The proposed project is inconsistent with the following General Plan Policies: • Circulation Element Program 7.4: Calls for the City to “discourage new gated communities.” • Community Character Element 17.1: Calls for “neighborhoods [to be] open and accessible to one another.” Although the General Plan discourages gated communities, there are numerous gated private streets and communities throughout Pleasanton. Some gates may have originally been agricultural gates, gates installed before a property was annexed into the City, or gates may have been approved prior to or despite the General Plan program. One such gate is at the base of Silver Oaks Terrace, within one mile of the subject area. Ruby Hill is another gated community off of Vineyard Avenue, and recently, the Merritt project, an age-restricted community, was approved with a gate. Vineyard Avenue Corridor Specific Plan. The proposed project is inconsistent with the following VACSP programs and design requirements: • Program 5.3: Discourage the development of further gated communities which inhibit the sense of greater community and make City utility and emergency services more difficult to provide. • Circulation Plan V(E)(6): Gated developments which preclude public access shall not be permitted unless required for agricultural protection purposes. To permit the installation of a gate at this location, staff recommends amending Circulation Plan V(E)(6) (page 63 of the VACSP) to read as follows: Gates, or gated developments, which preclude public access should not be permitted on private streets unless required for agricultural protection purposes there