PC 04/01/96 - Laserfiche WebLink

. . . . . . golf course while the Vineyard corridor property owners do not even have a development plan. He opposes the General Plan Update until reasonable density is allowed for the Vineyard corridor. Jim Happ, 39 California Avenue, #108, was on the Housing/Growth Sub-committee, which voted II-2 for 700 units for the Vineyard corridor. The two opposing wanted zero units. Mr. Happ stated the co-chairs did not take the sub-committee vote forward and only voted for 100 units in the Vineyard corridor. He feels the process was manipulated and that the majority of the Sub-committee members who dropped out were disillusioned with the process. Even if the three votes from members who had an interest in the Vineyard area were disqualified, the vote would have been 8-2. Mr. Happ stated that five of the six sub-committees also concurred with the Housing/Growth Sub-committee recommendation. He also spoke in opposition to the Steering Committee questionnaire seeking input about whether Pleasanton residents wanted housing in this area. Mr. Happ asked the Commission to look at the General Plan process and decide if it was handled fairly. Sharen Heinz, 1550 Vineyard Avenue, is in agreement with all the previous comments made regarding the Vineyard corridor development. She is in disagreement with the General Plan Update and reminded the Commission of the minority report which gave her property only one building unit. She feels the General Plan process was unfair and unreasonable. Irmeli Vatanen, 1506 Redwood Drive, Los Altos, manages the Brian Un property in the Vineyard corridor. She also concurs with all comments made previously regarding the Vineyard corridor. She discussed the feasibility of agricultural uses along Vineyard Avenue. At the time the Specific Plan was being developed, she contacted the U.C. Extension Service and many others and was advised by the experts that this area is too small, does not have the right type of soil for viticulture, the soil would need fumigation (which would impact the surrounding residential areas), viticulture requires spraying during the growing season (which would cause runoff into the arroyo). Also, row crops, such as flowers, have great competition from Mexico. The only feasible uses she can find are chicken, turkey, and pig farms. Norma Lemoine, 4456 Foothill Road, advised that her property had been annexed into the City, with a mixture of Low Density, Rural Density, and Open Space, for a total of 26 housing units. The General Plan Steering Committee is now recommending her property be rezoned by changing the Low Density Residential to Rural Density Residential and decreasing their total units to six (23 units in the Low Density Residential would be redesignated to three units in Rural Density Residential). Ms. Lemoine feels this will make her property unusable. She believes this rezoning is unreasonable in light of the zoning designations on the surrounding properties (Low and Medium Density Residential). Planning Colllllli$sion Minutes Page 5 April 1, 1996