CCMIN100615 - Laserfiche WebLink

crisis and while the number of homes proposed is not huge, what is lost by rezoning the land is tremendous. She said not only would rezoning result in more students, the Council would eliminate any potential future uses for additional school resources. The City of Dublin is nowhere near as impacted but they are now talking about growth issues and are under pause. She said there has been no solution made by Pleasanton to address school over-crowding yet rezoning is proposed for residential which adds more students. She asked that the Council wait and let the land remain as a potential future resource so overcrowding can be addressed. John Bauer said every applicant comes to the City's bodies and touts their outreach program for development but unfortunately this only allows input from existing members of the community and does not include the buyers of these homes. This development borders on one of the city's largest vacant land sites available and it has been designated as the East Pleasanton Specific Plan. The EIR contemplates the extension of El Charm Road between 1-580 and Stanley and relocation of Busch Road which borders the existing property. There are residents in housing developments who claim their developer did not properly disclose future development of nearby vacant property, specifically the Greenbriar development. Should the Council approve this application, it should stipulate in conditions and in deed disclosures that the developer discloses that the homes border a major piece of undeveloped property specifically the East Pleasanton Specific Plan. In addition, parking spaces for the Gardens were negotiated and he asked that the 22 spaces be deeded to the Gardens and that they cannot take spaces back in the future. John Maher said he supports this application and was asked to bring a letter from George Bowen which expresses support as well for the Council to approve the rezoning. Nicole Mason urged the Council to retain the land under its current zoning, stating it is a very big decision rezone the land and she thinks there are other piece of land designated for residential without taking away public and institutionally zoned land. When she purchased her home, she knew the land could provide uses under this zoning, and said she and her husband think it is very important to preserve the opportunity for schools and other programs that serve the community. If the land is turned into homes, the Council is not serving parents and asked to take more time in making a decision. Alfred Exner said it would have been nice if someone could display the General Plan land use designation and the amount of public and institutionally zoned land in the City. Regarding water, he reuses water for his garden and said he would like to see no action taken on additional housing until the drought is resolved. He thinks it is disingenuous to add another 100 people to the City and provide them with water while residents are letting their lawns, trees and landscaping die. Stephen Motzko said he attended meetings held by Ponderosa and the Planning Commission. He referred to the August 12th minutes of the Planning Commission, page 10 outlines his comments. He is a resident of the Village at Ironwood and is a recently elected board member of the HOA and has a concern with the shared landscape agreement that covers Busch and Ironwood. While a private matter, they look forward to changing this as this project moves forward. There was an attempt on March 14, 2012 by the Planning Commission to bring the church property and apartments into the landscape sharing agreement which was never acted on. Therefore, since then the Ironwood community has been paying 63% and the Village at Ironwood 37% of landscape costs, and they look forward to a more equitable agreement. He discussed this with Ms. Hardy and Mr. Schroeder who have been very cooperative in working on a fair agreement. Otherwise, they support the project. Pastor Barris clarified that by developing this piece of land requires money to not only buy land but to pay architects, City fees, build buildings, and the church has put enormous sums of money and borrowed money to build what they have. The church is not making money on this project and they are walking away with fewer resources. To minimize this loss and maximizing the good it can do in the community, there are no small churches that have the resources to buy this property. They can afford to sell it at a discount to a small church. The only opportunity that then remains is to sell the land for its City Council Minutes Page 15 of 28 October 6, 2015