01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Julia Lewis, Junipero Street, agreed with the Sunset Creek extension and addressed Measure PP. She stated upon voting for Measure PP, she was under the impression she was voting against mega houses on the ridge, not roads. She requested that the Council consider what is fair to the neighborhood when deciding the flow of traffic as Junipero Street and Independence Drive are already shouldering cut through traffic from other neighborhoods. Amy Lofland, Ventana Hills Steering Committee member, stated that traffic circulation has been a topic of discussion for many years. Measure PP did not included roads per the June 26, 2008 Council minutes and that she found no other documentation that roads are part of Measure PP. She preferred Option 2, but would support Option 3. John Bauer, resident, stated that prior to voting for Measure PP, voters had relied on the Measure PP analysis which showed the impact Measure PP would have the properties that would be affected if this project were to be approved. Mr. Bauer requested that the Council reject the current application to build 50 home rather that the 5 homes indicated in the analysis. Julie Rasnick, Hearst Drive resident, was a major signature gatherer for Measure PP and the reason for the signatures was to stop any constructions on the hills. She stated that the beauty of Pleasanton is the open hills and Measure PP was created to protect the hills. Ms. Rasnick also stated that grading the ridgelines, which would occur if roads are constructed in the area, is not in accordance with Measure PP. She suggested avoiding going through Sunset Creek Road unless the development is reduced to 10 homes. Michelle LaMarche, Hearst Drive resident, stated that all the talk regarding slopes, structure, culvert, bridge and retaining walls violate PP and her concern is that if this project is approved, it will set precedence for future development beyond Lund Ranch and throughout Pleasanton. Andy Burnstein, Dakin Court resident, felt it clear that the proposed connection to Sunset Creek is not a good for many reasons, such as environmental, legal, cost, etc., and the only justification given to proceed with Sunset Creek is the non-binding agreement created years ago. He made the comparison of the non-binding agreement with the Measure PP agreement, stating that the non-binding agreement can't be altered, however, Measure PP, which is a law is being interpreted based on individual opinions. Mr. Burstein stated that the consensus of tonight's meeting, in his opinion, is the flow of traffic. His argument is that in order to satisfy the residents is to limit the project to 10 homes. Allen Roberts, Grey Eagle Court resident, stated that the council should respect the vote of Pleasanton residents and reject any plans that would violate the guidelines of Measure PP. He referenced his writings to the council outlining multiple options of approving the project without violating Measure PP guidelines, and cited the options provided to the Council such as limiting the project to 10 homes as originally agreed upon by the residents. He requested Council to respect prior commitment made to voters. Carolyn Spain, Ventana Hills Steering Committee member and resident, commented on the intent of Measure PP, which was to control construction of residential and commercial projects and not roads that could possibly be on a 25 percent slope. Ms. Spain spoke on the traffic flow and safety of the community and asked the council to move forward with Option 2 as it does not violate the guidelines of Measure PP. Justin Brown, Junipero Street resident, spoke on road safety and requested the council to adopt Option 1. City Council Minutes Page 7 of 15 November 17, 2015