PC 021904 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Kameny stated that the Stoneridge Drive extension and the West Las Positas interchange, traffic, and the reduction of the housing cap were issues he considered important. Commissioner Sullivan stated that all the issues mentioned by Commissioner Roberts were important. He added that other issues he would like the Commission to consider are: housing - the housing cap, the size and density, affordability issues; traffic -congestion, cut-through, neighborhood and pedestrian safety; the Lund Ranch II and Kottinger Hills projects; open space; and the redevelopment of Pleasanton. He added that the Commission should consider making a recommendation to Council at this time to establish a moratorium on big issues such as the Lund Ranch II and Kottinger Hills developments as well as the Stoneridge Drive extension, particularly since the City is approaching build-out. Commissioner Maas inquired if the moratorium issue could be agendized for the regular Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Rasmussen replied that this matter could be raised at the joint Council-Commission workshop; then agendized for a subsequent Council meeting. Commissioner Arkin stated that the Council needs to take a formal position with respect to the Stoneridge Drive extension as this could change the direction of the General Plan Update process. Commissioner Sullivan commented that any decision the Council makes before the process is underway would limit what the Commission can do. He added that the General Plan should not be a political but a planning process, and, therefore, no decisions should be made before the process is completed. Commissioner Maas stated that all issues she considered important have already been mentioned. Commissioner Fox stated that leaving open space around Pleasanton should be considered at the General Plan meetings. She questioned the policy whereby developers are able to come back and propose development for an area where a development plan had earlier been defeated in a referendum. She expressed concern about the possibility of seizing private property through eminent domain in order to alleviate financial problems when lands are no longer available for development and would like the General Plan to prohibit Pleasanton from doing that. She added that the General Plan should also address a public process for controversial businesses desiring to come to Pleasanton. Commissioner Roberts commented that Pleasanton does not have a redevelopment area and, therefore, eminent domain would not be an issue here. b. Discussion Re¢ardina Existing Vacant Land Within the General Plan Planning Area Brian Swift, Planning Director, presented the staff report regarding an overview of land use matters, discussing the existing undeveloped areas, areas under construction and approved land uses, and build-out land uses. He presented the different factors influencing land use decisions, PLANNING COMMISSION GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MINUTES, 2/19/2004 Page 6 of ]0