01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Amy Lofland stated she is a resident of Ventana Hills and a part of Protect Pleasanton Neighborhoods. She supports the Council's position as the project involves concessions from neighborhoods and developers. Neighborhoods have worked since 1991 for an equitable solution. She expressed concerns that the information used to get people to sign the referendum is untrue (she distributed a document to Council) and residents are being told complete lies in order to get them to sign petitions. She also noted that if anyone would like to remove their signature from the petition, they can submit the request to the City Clerk by Thursday. Sandy Yamaoda has visited the proposed Lund Ranch II site and is an advocate for the referendum. She described two of her experiences while gathering signatures. She was approached negatively by an individual who asked her tricky questions when she had no way of knowing the answer. She referred him to the information on the petition and he called her a liar and that she should be ashamed of herself. She wanted to report the other side of the story. At the Farmer's Market someone interrupted her conversation and intimidation was happening on both sides. She supports having this matter referred to the voters. Kay Ayala stated that she abides by the referendum and has been involved in at least the past 3-4 referendum processes since she has been in Pleasanton. This is a good process and if you have the volunteer signature gatherers then the process works. You are asking for trouble if you hire outside paid signature gatherers. She said she warned the Ventana Hills residents that it will get ugly when paid signature gatherers are involved. She appealed to the Council to obtain the name of the paid signature gathering company. Mayor Thorne closed public comment. Mayor Thorne said the behavior described during public comments is not consistent with a "community of character." The signature gathering process is a legitimate process and he has done it himself and these types of behaviors did not happen in the past. A recessed for a brief break and resumed with all members of the Council present. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS 6. Continued from January 19, 2016 — Public Hearing: PUD-109, H. James Knuppe —Consider a certificate of appropriateness to demolish a 910 sq. ft. single-story commercial building, waived first reading and introduced approving PUD Rezoning to rezone property located at 273 Spring Street from the C-C (Central Commercial), Downtown Revitalization, Core Area Overlay District to PUD-C-C (Planned Unit Development — Central Commercial), Downtown Revitalization, Core Area Overlay District, and to construct 4,074 sq. ft. two-story commercial/office building with an attached 1,225 sq. ft. second-floor apartment unit, and four 2,015 sq. ft. three-story multi-family residential units A staff report was given by Planning Manager Adam Weinstein. He described that the project requires ezoning for specific reasons as it meets all requirements of the Municipal Code except for the prohibition on tandem parking. A PowerPoint Presentation was displayed. He showed images of the project via aerial photographs and noted the site is flat with small slopes. The property includes a 900 square foot building and has about 20 parking spaces. The proposed project currently includes vertical and horizontal mixed-use including a commercial building in the front with and four townhouse units in the back. Planning Manager Weinstein presented the commercial building's view from Spring Street and noted the important point that the commercial building is intentionally close to Spring Street, right up against the street to allow people to window shop. There have been critiques of the limited setback but these City Council Minutes Page 4 of 12 February 2,2016