My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
121515
>
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
>
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/16/2015 1:26:09 PM
Creation date
12/11/2015 2:21:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
12/15/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
146
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
get this on the ballot; then they voted at the election and won with 59.52 percent. She <br /> further indicated that now, they have to fight about changing the wording of Measure PP <br /> so developers can run traffic throughout Sycamore Creek Way and Sunset Creek Lane. <br /> She noted that the original plan was to run the traffic through Lund Ranch Road on the <br /> other side of the hills. <br /> Ms. LeLaurin stated that she moved to this area because she does not want the Los <br /> Angeles freeway running through her neighborhood. She indicated that she used to live <br /> on a crowded neighborhood in Pleasanton and that she now pays high property taxes to <br /> live in a nice neighborhood. <br /> Ms. LeLaurin stated that the wording on Measure PP stated that this Initiative can be <br /> amended or repealed only by the voters of the City of Pleasanton at a general election. <br /> She added that Measure PP is for the people of Pleasanton and not for the developers. <br /> She appealed to the Commission to remember that they struggled to get the measure <br /> on the ballot, they voted for it, and it won. She asked the Commission to think about <br /> them and not change the measure. She added that she has been living in the area for <br /> nine years and she is just tired of fighting. She requested that the Commission take this <br /> into consideration for the residents of Bridle Creek. <br /> Chair Blank asked Ms. Lelaurin if her view would be that Specific Plans should not be <br /> exempt from Measure PP in terms of the roads in the Specific Plans that were passed <br /> before Measure PP. <br /> Ms. LeLaurin said yes. She stated that everything that was written on Measure PP is <br /> how she feels and that reason she voted for it. She added that she thinks the road <br /> should be going through Lund Ranch Road. <br /> Greg O'Connor stated that he drafted a letter that he wanted to be part of the public <br /> record. He indicated that because this item will not be heard until the next meeting, he <br /> will not go through the entire letter but just highlight a couple of points. <br /> Mr. O'Connor stated that Measure PP is actually fairly short, and other speakers have <br /> already mentioned that the only way to make an exception to Measure PP is through a <br /> general election of the voters. He added that Measure PP also says that it overrides <br /> any existing General Plan, and by reference within the General Plan, it assumes it <br /> overrides the Specific Plans as well. He stated that Specific Plans and the General <br /> Plan really do not give any property rights to any individual, unlike a PUD or a <br /> development plan would. <br /> Mr. O'Connor stated that he did not intend to speak in specifics, but indicated that the <br /> Lund Ranch II project that was brought up tonight actually is not part of the North <br /> Sycamore Specific Plan and, therefore, is not covered by that. He added that the <br /> agreements mentioned that were made with other homeowners and other developers <br /> never extended to the owners of Lund Ranch II. <br /> PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 13, 2013 Page 7 of 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.