Pleasanton planning panel backs Ponderosa Homes project, recommends EIR certification and entitlements

The Pleasanton Planning Commission voted unanimously April 22 to recommend that city council certify the final environmental impact report and approve entitlements for Ponderosa Homes’ Hidden Canyon project, a hillside proposal that would annex roughly 130 acres and construct 28 new single‑family homes while rebuilding two existing residences and dedicating substantial open space and a small staging area for East Bay Regional Park District.

The commission’s recommendation covers three separate resolutions: certification of the final EIR, approval of project entitlements (annexation, general plan amendments, rezoning/pre‑zoning, vesting tentative tract map and planned unit development), and endorsement of a pre‑annexation and development agreement that would vest developer rights and secure public benefits including a trail staging area and, according to staff, monetary contributions toward Dublin Canyon Road improvements.

Natalie Amos, the city planner presenting the project, told commissioners the application stems from Pleasanton’s housing element work and would formalize and annex a site that staff has tracked since 2018. Amos said the proposal includes a mix of private and public open space, life‑estate dedication of a parcel to the East Bay Regional Park District for a staging area, on‑site improvements such as sidewalks and bike lanes, and a traffic signal the applicant agreed to install to address long‑standing safety concerns on Dublin Canyon Road.

"This is a project that's been long time coming with the city of Pleasanton," Amos said during the presentation, summarizing the project history and the package of entitlements the commission was asked to recommend for approval.

City traffic staff described the transportation analysis for the commission. Michael, the city's traffic analyst, said single‑family homes generally generate roughly one PM peak hour trip per dwelling and that the 28 new homes would add about 28 peak hour trips. He said the development alone did not meet traditional signal warrants but that a signal was recommended as a community safety benefit and had been requested by nearby residents.

"Our recommendation was to install a traffic signal because it makes it easier," Michael said, describing the safety and access benefits for residents on the north side of Dublin Canyon Road.

The applicant, Jeff Trader of Ponderosa Homes, said the developer had worked with East Bay Regional Park District staff and neighborhood groups and showed a 3‑D visualization for the commission. Trader also told commissioners the pre‑annexation and development agreement requires the traffic signal to be installed early in the buildout schedule — by issuance of the 11th building permit — and that surety bonds would guarantee construction of the public improvements.

Several nearby residents and neighborhood representatives spoke at the public hearing. Janet Gardner, president of the Canyon Meadows Homeowners Association, said the community supported the project’s inclusion of a traffic signal at the blind curve on Dublin Canyon Road. "We are very in support of the development plan which includes the addition of a traffic signal," Gardner said.

Longtime resident Sarah Hollister urged the city to require the signal early in construction rather than pushing it to the end of the buildout, and asked for written assurances about timing and enforcement. "How do we get some kind of insurance in writing or a contract that this light will be put in not at the end of the project but sometime earlier?" she asked the commission.

Crosby Drive resident Andrew Gilb raised concerns about impacts to existing scenic views and asked for strong landscape and color‑palette conditions to reduce visual effects. "That view is going to be destroyed by this project," Gilb said, urging requirements for mature trees, non‑glare windows and careful retaining‑wall design.

East Bay Regional Park District principal planner Kim Tai told commissioners the park district supports the proposed staging area and trail connection, and said the district will seek a long‑term funding mechanism as part of project approvals to operate and maintain the facility.

Amos told the commission that most environmental impacts identified in the final EIR would be mitigable to less‑than‑significant with standard mitigation monitoring and reporting, but that transportation impacts using the county VMT methodology are unavoidable for many low‑density housing sites; staff recommended a statement of overriding considerations given the public benefits the project brings, including the staging area and the signal.

Commissioners praised the applicant’s community outreach and the 3‑D visualization, discussed constraints imposed by Measure PPQ and steep topography that limited lot yield, and debated whether more accessory dwelling units or single‑story layouts could be encouraged. Several commissioners also urged staff and the applicant to work to accelerate outside‑agency approvals to avoid long delays before construction can start.

After discussion, the commission made three separate motions — to recommend certification of the final EIR, to recommend approval of the entitlements, and to recommend approval of the pre‑annexation and development agreement — and passed all three by unanimous voice vote. Chair Pace said the recommendations will go to city council for final consideration.

Next steps for the project include the city council hearings on the resolutions, and a multi‑agency permitting process (including LAFCO, Army Corps of Engineers and state wildlife agencies) the applicant said could push on‑site construction into 2028 or later.

Actions recorded by the commission on April 22 will be part of the council record when the city considers final approvals.