CCMIN061698 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Smith did not believe there would be an additional cost if the property owners are required to pay $40,000. However, some of the residents would be paying interest over twenty years because of not having the funds readily available. If there is a cap of $20,000 he would like the developers and the City to pick up the difference. He felt the existing residents should be given special treatment. Don Temple, 6409 Alisal, supported the golf course and the Specific Plan. He said it has been a long road to reach this point and thanked those who have listened. The current and future residents of the City should be pleased with the opportunities that this Plan provides. He is concerned with staff's recommendations concerning water and sewer costs. He felt the connection to City water and sewer would not increase the value of the homes significantly. Staff stated that there was more than enough water and sewer capacity to accommodate existing residents, but staff claims the system must be increased in size. The North Sycamore Specific Plan was supposed to set the precedent for this Plan. It excluded the existing residents from cost sharing unless they subdivided their property. The issues of the residents have been ignored. He heard tonight that the existing residents' pre-annexation request is illegal. The residents are asking the City to pay for the infrastructure and the existing residents would pay for the hookups and for running the lines to their homes. Even the Planning Commission acknowledged that staff's recommendations were not fair and proposed a compromise. This project will have a serious impact on the residents' way of life. Funds from the sale of homes should be used to cover the infrastructure costs. He said the City has used the wells in the area to supplement its water during the drought. He asked that the City return the favor and accept the preannexation proposal regarding sewer and water costs. Craig Champion, 777 California Avenue, Palo Alto, representing Summerhill Homes, said the biggest issue is the cost sharing for the bypass road. From the guidelines in the North Sycamore Specific Plan and in discussions with staff, Summerhill Homes understood the program to be cost sharing. After the Happy Valley Specific Plan was published, Summerhill realized that cost sharing was not to be implemented. The objection is that Summerhill Homes would pay 100% for its portion of the bypass road that leads down from the lower density area up to the medium density parcel even though only 40% of the traffic would use this road. Overall Summerhill likes the Specific Plan and would like to see the golf course move forward. Summerhill proposed six units of medium density be transferred to the area by the entrance to the golf course. These units would be valued at 1.5 million, the cost for Summerhill's portion of the bypass road. With this trade Summerhill would construct the bypass road up to the medium density site and cost share the remainder. The Planning Commission approved this proposal. The proposal provides for a portion of the Spotorno property to go to the City, giving the City six additional units. He would like to stay with six units and not three. Summerhill has been working with the residents on Alisal Street regarding the lower 22 lots. The original. plan had six acres designated as open space but the residents preferred to have the open space dispersed throughout the lower area. He submitted a plan with the entrance off Alisal Street for 22 units on 1.3 acres instead of 1 acre. He said most of the units in the medium density are at the top of the development and it would cost approximately 3 million dollars to construct the Pleasanton City Council 10 06/16/98 Minutes