PC 072600 - Laserfiche WebLink

concern with the environmental issues. She noted that the most beautiful part of the project is the west section and expressed concern with filling this area with houses and leaving the central portion of the development empty. She expressed concern with irafflc impacts and suggested that housing be relocated closer to the city center and that the density of the project should not be higher. Robert Horstman, 2508 Tapestry Way, expressed concern with traffic issues, the elimination of the Las Positas Interstate 680 Interchange, and houses being placed on the western side of parcel. He suggested that the park be located on the west side of the parcel. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Kameny, he noted he preferred the original plan. Mr. Swift provided an overview of the City Council's proposed uses for the central parcel. Valerie Raymond, 2368 Buena Vista, Tri-Valley Vision 2010 Plan, expressed concern with the City of Pleasanton's lack of housing and the impacts to other communities. She commented on the traffic impacts of creating jobs when no housing is being provided. She further expressed concern with the fast tracking of this project and noted that the approximately 17 hearings have been held in relation to the North Livermore Plan. She continued by stating this project will have impacts on the City of Livermore. She requested that the Commission provide an answer to the question: "What communities are you asking to take the housing that the City of Pleasanton is not provid'mg for the jobs that are being created?" In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Arkin, Mr. Swift commented on the EIR process and the number of hearings that have been held in regard to this project. He noted that this project has held more hearings than the North Livermore Plan. Further, he noted that in the City there are now more jobs than resident workers. Robert Cordtz, 262 West Angela, requested that the City Engineer comment on the flood control for the San Francisco Bernal property. He further inquired whether the City of San Francisco will still dedicate the half-acre of land for the right of way, the quarter of an acre for off-site work, and conlribufion of up to 50 pemant of bridge constxuction not to exceed $700,000. Mr. Swift responded affirmatively. He further inquired who will pay for the traffic controls and interchange. Mr. Swift stated this project will pay for the intemhunge, Bemal improvements, and 50 percent of the cost of the bridge. Mr. Orubstick noted that Zone 7 is conducting a master plan for the watershed area. Mr. Cordtz noted that Alternative 7A balances out with the property on Foothill Road. He further commented on the traffic issues created in this area by the Kaiser project. He stated that there are no TSM designations into the Green Building practices and initiated discussion with Greenbfiar developers as to the monetary effects on homes in the Greenbfiar development if Green Building practices are included. In conclusion, he noted he would support the Greenbriar plan. Bob Nickeson, 4260 Pleasanton Avenue, noted he would not support additional homes on the Bernal property. He spoke in favor of retaining as much rural character as possible. He noted that affordable housing is a regional problem. He request~l that the west side of the property be kept as open space as much as possible. He suggested that some of the units on the west side be shifted to other parts of the site. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 26, 2000 Page 12