My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN120115
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
CCMIN120115
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/17/2015 1:41:16 PM
Creation date
12/17/2015 1:41:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
12/1/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
Mark Priscaro addressed the council on the fairness factor that the residents of Ventana Hills and <br /> Mission Hills would have to endure if the proposed plan was approved. Mr. Priscaro pointed out several <br /> key issues that were mentioned at the November 17th council meeting and whether or not these issues <br /> raised were fair to the residents of Ventana Hills and Mission Hills. <br /> Teresa Cross spoke regarding the decision Councilmember Pentin made to recuse himself from voting <br /> on this topic when it was determined there's no conflict of interest in place. Ms. Cross felt that by <br /> Councilmember Pentin making the decision to excuse him from the voting process of this project, he <br /> has "reduced his role as a councilmember, to simply a popularity contest," which is not what being a <br /> member of the Council is about. She concluded by stating that she expects Councilmember Pentin to <br /> exercise his responsibilities as a councilmember and worry less about how the public felt about him. <br /> John Bauer stated that upon review of the purchase document of his home, there were no disclosures <br /> made that Ventana Hills was connected with Lund Ranch II. Mr. Bauer also stated that the issue the <br /> residents of Pleasanton have is that Measure PP's terminology has never been and is still not defined. <br /> He went on to state that it is not up to the city staff to define the terms of Measure PP, nor do they have <br /> the authority to do so and that the terms need to be defined by the City Council and without such, <br /> everyone, including the developer, city staff, planning commission, and the residents are at a standstill. <br /> David Block commented on whether or not a road is a structure. Mr. Block stated that Measure PP <br /> shouldn't be the deciding factor of where to build the access road. He noted the issue is the influx of <br /> traffic and lack of pedestrian sidewalks that will occur once construction was completed on Junipero <br /> Street. He recommended that all traffic be routed through Sunset Creek Lane and not on Lund Ranch <br /> Road and Junipero Street. <br /> Linda Perricone commented that she lives on the corner of Junipero Street and San Antonio. Ms. <br /> Perricone mentioned the intersection has a traffic stop that motorists are not obeying. Ms. Perricone <br /> noted her concern regarding the safety of the residents in the community and expressed her feelings <br /> that the building of the new homes will not only bring on more traffic, but will take away from the quality <br /> of life that Pleasanton is such a good place to live. <br /> Sheila Cotter requested Council to approve Greenbriar's project on their development of Lund Ranch <br /> and stated that the traffic on Mission Hills and Junipero Street are already at high levels and cannot <br /> accommodate any more traffic. She noted the extension of Sunset Creek Way is a natural contour to <br /> the valley of Lund Ranch and the development plan is not to remove that road, but to reuse it. She <br /> concluded by asking the Council to allow the development and to extend access to Sunset Creek for all <br /> traffic to the Lund Ranch. <br /> Vicki LaBarge stated that Junipero Street was never intended as a through street and spoke about the <br /> amount of traffic the residents experience on a daily basis. The issue is not about Measure PP, but <br /> rather the two neighborhoods that do not want the excess of traffic new construction will bring. She <br /> further stated that the issue at hand should solely be about this PUD, not to set precedence for future <br /> developments. <br /> Carolyn Spain spoke on Measure PP stating that there's nothing listed within Measure PP that included <br /> roads. The decision to be made by the council is centered solely on PUD-25 since each PUD stands <br /> alone. She stated that homeowners of Sycamore Heights and Bridal Creek signed Covenants, <br /> Conditions and Restrictions upon purchase of their homes which states the potential change of their <br /> community which may include Sunset Creek Lane to become a through street for Sycamore Height <br /> upon development of properties to the east and for Bridal Creek, homeowners agree and accepted that <br /> there may be traffic impact associated with potential future development of the Lund Ranch property. <br /> She state that Ventana Hills and Mission Park are already compromising by accepting traffic from <br /> Middleton and the cut through traffic that will result from the homes currently being built in the nearby <br /> City Council Minutes Page 5 of 16 December 1, 2015 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.