My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
121515
>
01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/11/2015 4:01:18 PM
Creation date
12/9/2015 12:47:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
12/15/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
01
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
City Attorney Lowell requested staff to clarify that the motion included Certifying the EIR and the <br /> modifications or minor changes staff had provided previously to the approval documents and that those <br /> amendments would be included as well. <br /> Councilmember Olson agreed. <br /> City Attorney Lowell confirmed the council was approving staff recommendation as amended by the <br /> motion. <br /> Councilmember Olson agreed. <br /> Councilmember Narum acknowledged the dedication and efforts of everyone present and to those that <br /> have sent emails or contributed to the dialogue and what was the intent. She thanked the Planning <br /> Commission as they spent a lot of their time and effort in trying to reach some kind of decision <br /> regardless of whether or not the Council agreed with it. She believes she has always tried to look and <br /> find the solutions where people generally left only half happy and felt she has done her job. She <br /> acknowledged that there's difference of opinion and those that she has talked with know that she <br /> struggled with this decision and there doesn't appear to be any kind of clear path forward that will make <br /> everyone happy <br /> She noted promises made by earlier Council members that were made to one neighborhood, the <br /> CCR's for the other neighborhood, the overlay of Measure PP and what that meant and she believes it <br /> clouds the current council a little. She noted when you look at Measure PP it was very clear in the voter <br /> document by the former City Attorney that there was going to need to be some clarifications made and <br /> specifically with structures and ridgelines. You know you look at this and the signers of Measure PP <br /> don't all agree. We've got two neighborhoods and their interpretation of Measure PP I have found is <br /> different. She noted that the Council not agreeing is also not surprising. As a Council it's a tough thing. <br /> She felt she started to back up and look and consider they really think the goal and intent of Measure <br /> PP was by the voters and it's pretty clear to her that they were looking to preserve the hillsides and the <br /> ridgelines and in creating the view of the hills from down below as well as creating open space. The <br /> rally cry around it was "save our hills" and as she said last time and I think the Mayor said the fact is <br /> that this application would look a lot different if it was not for Measure PP as it has done a number of <br /> things here that are positive for the community ranging from being down to 48 homes versus a number <br /> from somewhere over a hundred at one time. The houses will be down in a bowl and will be hardly <br /> visible from the flat land of Pleasanton, which is what we want. She stated that this latest road is <br /> shorter and it reduces the grading and it saves a number of Heritage trees which she believes is just as <br /> important. It separates the trail from the road and so the bottom line is on this project the houses are <br /> down low, the ridge, that land, that beautiful land up above is going to be protected and owned by the <br /> City and we're going to get a community benefit here of 160 acres, with trails and open space, in <br /> perpetuity, which is a fabulous. <br /> She noted the last time she indicated she continued to favor access and favored access from both <br /> neighborhoods and she continues to believe that is the right thing to do for a couple of reasons. She <br /> thinks that there should be access or the ability to access this open space coming from two different <br /> directions and she thinks that the fire, safety and the EVA road and believes having a little bit of the <br /> road in there for fire engines and police cars are a positive particularly when you're looking up that hill <br /> now and see the nice lovely brown grass without any water. A couple of things that this project has <br /> really brought forward for her or made her aware of was this cut-through traffic from Bernal through <br /> Independence and that whole neighborhood. However, on the other side she believes there is <br /> uncertainty about the bypass road as to when it will happen and what the impacts will be. <br /> City Council Minutes Page 11 of 16 December 1,2015 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.