01 - Laserfiche WebLink

15. Public Hearing Continued from July 20, 2010: PDAM -03, Pleasanton Gateway, L.L.C. (Scott Trobbe) — Approve an application to extend the Development Agreement between the City of Pleasanton and Pleasanton Gateway for an additional seven years regarding an eight - building office development totaling 745,000 square feet on an approximately 39.22 -acre site at 6750 Bernal Avenue Community Development Director Brian Dolan said the item before the Council is a request to extend the development agreement that covers the Bernal Property Specific Plan area. The request was originally to extend it for 10 years, and staff had some concerns about this and ultimately agreed with the applicant that the application would be for seven additional years. It is important to note that the original agreement covered quite a large area and had several players involved. This represents the original pre- annexation development agreement area and this covered approximately 516 acres. Other than the land that the City owns and plans to continue to develop as a park, there is only one undeveloped piece of property. So, the extension of the agreement only applies to that area. Mr. Dolan presented a graphic of various developments that have occurred over time; the Greenbriar development, the KB Homes development, additional residential and the radial street pattern off of Valley Avenue, the apartment complex, and the convenience retail center on Valley and Bernal. He reviewed some key requirements of the development agreement and distinguished between which ones have been fulfilled and those yet to be fulfilled. Councilmember Sullivan referred to an inference of "payment pending" and asked when this would occur. Mr. Dolan said the scope of the improvement has evolved over time. In fact, the improvement once thought required at that particular location is different, and it has a reduced scope. It is likely that the cost will change and staff will bring this back to the Council sometime in the future. Councilmember Sullivan questioned and confirmed that Caltrans has been part of this scope change. Mr. Fialho added that the City is out to bid on design services for this interchange improvement and is waiting to see what the level of design will be before collecting or creating an arrangement with remaining parties as to how the payment gets accomplished. Councilmember McGovern said she thought that in a recent Oak Grove development project, there was a statement of overriding consideration about Bernal Avenue, 1 -680, and the level of service. She questioned if this was a different portion of the project. Mr. Tassano explained that for a time the City had the Bernal at Valley intersection as a gateway intersection. Councilmember McGovern said she believed that statements of overriding consideration was needed because the level of service would not be improved. Mr. Tassano noted that currently they both operate at acceptable levels of service; it is after development of the gateway project where staff would see reduced service levels at those intersections. Councilmember Sullivan confirmed with the City Manager that when the agreement was first approved, two EIR's were done; one which involved Phase One and another EIR for Phase Two, or the public improvements. Councilmember Sullivan noted it is 10 years later and he questioned whether or not it made sense to re- evaluate the environmental impacts on today's conditions versus 10 years ago. Mr. Dolan said staff gave that serious thought; however, there are really no substantial physical circumstances to the environment which led staff to believe an EIR should be done. He said City Council Minutes Page 8 of 11 August 17, 2010