CCMIN011696 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mark Sweeney, Hacienda Marketing and Sales Corporation, representing Prudential Insurance, indicated he was available to respond to questions. He indicated this property was worth substantially more than $743,000. Errtie Manzo, 5228 Genovesio Drive, was very much in favor of a park. However, if the Spanos project is approved there will be an additional 3,000 people in the area. This park will be a tremendous asset because of the high density developments in the area. He was concerned with the parking issue and use of the park by outside parties. He also supported a bridge across Tassajara Creek, otherwise the park would not be workable. He also expressed concern that the park may be overrun by so many people. E. J. Saucier, 5216 Genovesio Drive, felt the park was too small because of the number of people who will be using the park. He also expressed concern about the housing mix and the high density. With regard to noticing, he indicated there were only a few residents in Valentis now to voice opinions. If the intent of the park is for businesses to use it, that changes things even more. Derck Zemrak, 5222 Gcnovesio Drive, also felt the park was too small, but was very much in support of a park in Hacienda Business Park. Angelins Summen, 4750 Sutter Gate Avenue, preferred that a park not be built in Hacienda Business Park. She was happy more business are being attracted to the Business Park and Hacienda is being used as it was originally intended, not for residential. She felt that Pare~ F was a renmant of less value because of the five easements and assessments. If the City doesn't buy it, who will? She felt that for Prudential, this is an area that is unusable and possibly unsellable and did not feel the City should help them out. She expressed her concern that much of the property was not visible from public roads and felt there was a safety issue. She felt there was a parking problem and people would have to park in adjacent commercial areas. If Council feels a park is necessary, she preferred it to be five acres at the southern end of Lot 60. Mr. Pico did not feel this parcel was the best for a neighborhood park. He agreed it was too small, ~ially when it has to include parking and other facilities. He supported acquiring a park sit~ in Lot 60 that could be tied into the linear park and he wantut more than five ames. He felt staff should investigate acquiring seven or eight acres in order to provide the parking and the large number of people who will use the facility. There are a lot of houses in the area and in some cases no sidewalks or places for the kids to play. He did not feel five acres was adequate; he did not like the proposed design nor the location. Ms. Acosta clarified that this is a six acre site and once the parking is taken out, it is five acres of usable park land. Mr. Tarver agreed with Mr. Pico, however, he was concerned about not providing parks for the residential areas of Hacienda Business Park. He wants a park for the approved 01/16/96 -18-