01 - Laserfiche WebLink

process like other sites. She asked the Council to also look at Sites 8, 11 and 14 collectively as a cluster because they are so closely located. Lastly, she asked the Council to consider traffic. Because there is no site specific plan in the area developed, the traffic problem is already known. She asked to reduce the number of units down to 400, because putting 800 units in one cluster would create an unreasonable traffic burden. Anil Chaudry said he lives in the Walnut Hills area close to Site 7 and he chose it because of its openness and a nearby park, views, and schools all close by. He felt the area would no longer be desirable if developed with high density housing, but was supportive of the potential office development. He would like to know the source from statements about 70% less traffic impacts from residential building versus office, noting that there is no traffic during the weekends with an office complex. Regarding schools, they would like to know the real effect and how the District will handle the additional students. He voiced uncertainty in how the City arrived at the sites and asked staff to identify more sites throughout the City. He also thinks Site 7 would bear most of the burden for high density housing. Ashna Komar, student at Hurst Element School, stated she does not want high density housing because their school is already full and they have many budget cuts. If homes are built, the schools will be fuller and traffic busier than it is now. It will also not be as safe to walk to school and might become very loud and noisy. Pat Costanza, Jr., representing Kiewitt (Site 11), said they have owned the site for over 40 years, have employed over 80 people up to about two years ago, and are very interested in working with the community in designing a well-planned project. They are identified for 10 acres in the plan and he requested this be maintained for the property. The site is well-suited for a 30 unit/acre development given its location at Valley and Bush. It already has all utilities to the property and the capacity for the utilities, and will allow a nice mixed use project. They are also already adjacent to residential development and the site is well situated environmentally. When looking at Sites 8, 14 and 11, he asked that they be reviewed independently for their individual merits. Carl Pretzel said their homeowners association has a response in draft to the Valley Church Trails property owner's rebuttal who basically disagreed with every point. He said at the last task force meeting, they unanimously decided to remove it. The Housing and Planning Commissions unanimously decided to keep it off the list, and he asked to continue to keep it off the list. Steve Dunn, Legacy Partners, said they own Site 14 and are very supportive of 12 acres out of the 320 acres being allocated from their site. They also have utilities and private access out to I- 580 which can mitigate some of the traffic concerns people may have. They are also anxious to move through the process and through the East Side Specific Plan process. They submitted conceptual drawings and have worked with staff for over three years and look forward to that process commencing, are supportive of high density but would also be receptive to reducing the density to 20 units/acre, lessening the development by 84 units and probably be more appropriate with 2-3 stories for the site. Councilmember McGovern questioned the actual number of developable acres. Mr. Dunn said they have 320 acres of which approximately 51 acres are within the City today and zoned industrial within the City. Scott Trobbe, Pleasanton Gateway, said the velocity of this process has caught everybody by surprise and he agreed it is hard to obtain all information and facts. They appreciate the City Council Minutes Page 11 of 19 May 3, 2011