CCMIN021798 - Laserfiche WebLink

original plan of high density, low-income housing. Since Greenbriar was willing to pay in-lieu fees, the issue should be dropped. She urged Council to maintain the low density, quality development. Bud Barlow, 6723 Alisal Street, asked the developer how many houses would be on the north side of Sycamore.'? Mr. Constanzo said nine lots total. Mr. Barlow wanted Council to stick to the 43,000 square foot lots, not 40,000 square feet. He said it stated on page 29 of the staff report that any property fronting Sycamore would be one acre lots. Shelley Cartier, 4444 First Street, represented her mother at 982 Sycamore Road, who had never been notified of any meetings. She said Sycamore Road needed to stay the way it was. The proposed Road A would cut off half her mother's street and her mother wanted to keep her Sycamore address. She felt the golf course would create significant traffic that would adversely affect her mother's property. Her proposal was to sell homes where Road A is a cul- de-sac and it would not have the golf course traffic. She mentioned this has been brought up by other Sycamore residents to have the street stay where it is. She would appreciate it if someone would address this issue. She spoke about the low-income housing being in specific areas where low-income families could afford to live. She felt the rural atmosphere was not being protected. Pat Murray, 4470 Mirador, wanted to address the issue of affordable housing. She commented that everyone says let' s have affordable, but not in my neighborhood. The citizens of Pleasanton need to come to grips with reality. She felt people needed to either allow affordable housing in their neighborhood or lower the prices on their homes so people can afford to live here. Barbara Mostardi, 5824 San Juan Way, said Greenbriar has been wonderful to work with and agreed to one story homes on the north so she could maintain her view. She felt that she probably paid $150,000 more for her home because of her view and there would be nice homes on large lots behind her. She felt Council should stick to the specific plan. She did not approve of the secondary units. She felt the secondary units would take away from the value of the home. Mr. Constanzo responded to the public comments. First he quoted the State law and indicated that secondary units are a valuable form of housing in the State of California. Secondary units provide housing for family members, students, the elderly, in-home health providers, the disabled and others, all at below market prices within existing neighborhoods. The secondary units offered as part of the project can be counted as the city' s good faith effort to meet its affordable housing goals. Greenbriar stands behind the secondary units and said they Pleasanton City Council 2/17/98 Minutes 17