RES 2026039 - Laserfiche WebLink

property”, and “no trespassing” signs. They had to “toss” their bikes over a fence into a closed area of the Park then peddle approximately 300 yds through the closed area to gain access to the ridge trail. The bikers had no regard for private property ownership or to damage they were causing to the environment. This is a serious environmental impact and while it may be convenient for Ponderosa Homes, Inc. to ignore it in the DEIR report, it must be addressed before this project is approved by the Pleasanton Planning Commission. I state once more, how will the public go to/from the staging/parking area to the north ridge trailhead at Canyon 3 and what is the environmental impact of their movement? What measures will be implemented to ensure the rights of adjacent private property owners will be respected? Appendix A is a letter which I recently wrote to EBRPD Trail Supervisor complaining about bicyclists who were trespassing on private property and ignoring any attempt to control their movement in the north end of the Pleasanton Ridge Park. How will this behavior be controlled in the future? What is to prevent the public from wandering all over the meadow and destroying the pristine environment that is the meadow. The trespassing bicyclist behavior presented in Appendix A demonstrates what happens when you have no plan! EBRPD projects are required to comply with CEQA, as it's a state law governing actions by public agencies that can affect the environment. EBRPD uses CEQA to review and mitigate impacts for trail development and facility construction. Therefore, EPRPD is required to submit an EIR for the staging area and trail that will lead to the Ridge trailhead. They should coordinate with Ponderosa Homes, Inc. at this time to present a DEIR for public review on the totality of the project. In the project report, it is stated “there are no historic structures present on the project site. This statement is incorrect. The Lester family home is an early California Stucco house (to the best of my knowledge) very likely 100+ years old. The house is shown in Figure 12. What appears to be a stone column supporting the roof over the porch is shown in Figure 13. In my youth (70 years ago-the mid-1950s), I was invited into the house by Manuel Terra (Diane and Myron Lester’s grandfather) who lived in the house. The house appeared to be old, even then. I recall Manuel stated the house belonged to his parents, which would make it very old. The house is a historic resource. The City of Pleasanton requires that the character of such historic houses be preserved, especially the front façade, under city ordinances. This means the house can’t be demolished and the key features of the house cannot be significantly altered without strong justification. I can find no discussion in the EIR of this house. It must be considered, evaluated, and very likely preserved. Project Justification What is the “true” justification to approve the construction of 28 new luxury homes under the name Hidden Canyon Residences and Preserve? If the Lester property is not annexed into the City and remains in Alameda County the land will be “preserved” because it is zoned Agricultural and no more than three new buildings can be constructed on the Lester property (e.g., primary house, T. Vinson Page 6 of 28 11 CONT 12 13 14