Laserfiche WebLink
File Number: 14-302 <br />private security. In general, residents choose to live in gated communities for the sense of <br />safety, privacy, and community, and to keep out unwanted individuals such as strangers and <br />thieves. <br />Studies and data indicate that besides car theft, gated communities do not have less crime <br />than un-gated communities (Blakely, 2012). This is because gates do not make communities <br />safer and provide little in the way of extra protection by creating an artificial or false sense of <br />security, which can lead to complacency (e.g., leaving garage doors open). Also, the apparent <br />affluence of a gated community can also make the community a more attractive target for <br />theft, especially burglary (Bell & Lang, 1998). Further, the objectives of community gating <br />decline over time, based upon studies that find gate codes are eventually shared with friends <br />of residents, delivery people, vendors, and tradespeople (Snyder, 1997). <br />One important issue that faces gated communities is that the restricted gate access can <br />hamper emergency personnel efforts of police, ambulances, and fire trucks through slower <br />response times, which can lead to public safety issues. Also, gated communities can fragment <br />neighborhoods and erode a sense of community, social stability, and social structure within a <br />community, as residents located in gated communities are disconnected from their larger <br />communities and are less likely to be civically engaged. The lack of social cohesion and lower <br />social interaction may result in socioeconomic polarization, which can lead to segregation, <br />isolation, and exclusion (Blakely & Snyder, 1997). Studies show that a Neighborhood Watch <br />Program is the most effective way to reduce crime primarily through neighbors keeping an eye <br />out for each other, which is an effective basic defense against crime and a means to build <br />stronger community (Drew & McGuigan, 2014). <br />Permits and/or Variances Granted <br />PD-77-11 received City Council approvals for the general and precise development plans in <br />1977 and 1978 for the development of Floresta Gardens. It is accessed via Caliente Drive, a <br />private drive intersecting Washington Avenue as well as a secondary drive accessed from the <br />cul-de-sac end of Fremont Avenue. During the original review process, City staff <br />recommended that a restrictive gate be placed along the Fremont Avenue entry to discourage <br />cut-through traffic. A dual-lift arm-style gate was approved during the precise development <br />plan process. Due to repeated incidents of vehicles driving through the barrier and vandalism <br />of the gates, a building permit application was submitted to allow for the installation of a <br />six-foot tall remote controlled wrought iron vehicular swing style gate with a keyed pedestrian <br />gate. In 2012, a building permit was issued to allow for installation of the requested vehicular <br />and pedestrian gates along Fremont Avenue. Staff approved the building permit application <br />due to the existing condition in PD-77-11 allowing for a vehicular gate at this frontage. <br />Restrictive fencing along the Washington Avenue frontage was not a part of the original <br />proposal. The City determined that the proposal is a major modification of the PD, and <br />therefore requires approval by the City Council. <br />Environmental Review <br />This project, to construct new gates and fences, is categorically exempt from the California <br />Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guideline Article 19, Section 15303 (e), New <br />Construction of Small Structures. <br />Page 5 City of San Leandro Printed on 7/15/2014