Laserfiche WebLink
Commission to take a look at all of the agreements, all of the time and energy that went <br />into that from their predecessors, as well as all of the neighbors who are here, and <br />adhere to those agreements. <br />Amy Lofland read from a prepared statement as follows: <br />"I'm also a member of the Ventana Hills Steering Committee and have been since its <br />inception. I'd like to remind the members of the Planning Commission that many <br />Southeastern neighborhoods and community members of Pleasanton worked in <br />conjunction with the City at City-run workshops in 1991 and 1992 to help shape the <br />final outcome of the North Sycamore Specific Plan and the Happy Valley Specific <br />Plan. Contrary to some comments tonight, this was done part in part to mitigate <br />concerns that new development could overtax existing neighborhoods with traffic it <br />was not designed to cany. The North Sycamore Specific Plan and the Happy Valley <br />Specific Plan provide for roads built and designed to handle this additional <br />development traffic. Previous members of the City staff, Planning Commissioners, <br />City Councilmembers, and various people within the community worked diligently <br />together to reach agreement and create these specific plans. The City Council <br />supported roads as structures in the workshop on November 27th which I was <br />present at, only with the understanding that PUDs and specific plans prior to 2008 <br />would be grandfathered in. You heard from an author of Measure PP tonight that <br />having roads considered a structure was not part of Measure PP. The people of <br />Pleasanton voted to protect the ridgelines; not to overtax existing neighborhoods <br />with traffic from new developments. There are specific plans in place to assure this <br />will not happen and they need to be followed. To decide that roads are a structure <br />and are therefore held to the limitations of Measures PP and QQ would be contrary <br />to the ongoing process and would put undue and unplanned traffic stress on existing <br />neighborhoods that already have high traffic for the way the neighborhood streets <br />were designed. It has been planned since 1992 to go out the East/West Collector <br />which is Sycamore Creek Way. The years of City- sponsored neighborhood and <br />community collaboration and planning need to be upheld. Basically, I'm reading it so <br />1 can have it in there, but this has been going on, and 1 can tell you I've been at this <br />for 22 years. I don't want to put undue stress on any neighborhood, and that is why <br />we worked so hard to get this done. And, think about it, if you go back 22 years, <br />that's a lot of Planning Commission and Council." <br />Raj Rajagopalan stated that he is not here to offend anybody or say anything wrong. <br />He indicated that he understands traffic problems, and people do not want traffic going <br />through their street and want it to go to the next street. He stated that he does not want <br />traffic going through any street, and that's the way he would like to look at it. He <br />inquired if this is part of the Greenbriar property and where the problem is, because that <br />has always been a problem in this City. He added that since he bought a house from <br />Greenbriar, there have been nothing but problems because Greenbriar never disclosed <br />anything and lied about everything. He noted that the City also went for it because he <br />spoke at meetings in 2004 and 2005 and suggested that signs be installed indicating <br />that this would be a thru- street, just as they do in towns like Alamo and Danville. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES.. March 13, 2013 Page 18 of 35 <br />