CCMIN121195 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Roush stated that if the County adopted a specific plan or a PUD zoning or rezoning, these acts are subject to referendum. Brenda Weak, 5995 Corte Venado, does not feel the current proposed plan is close to what the citizens of Pleasanton want for this property. Unacceptable to her are: The request for growth management as early as 1997; no mitigation of traffic effects of this project; the location of housing and commercial development along the entire length of Bernal Avenue; the large number of housing units. Ms. Weak raised other development projects, such as Vineyard Avenue development, possibly increased South Pleasanton housing in lieu of a planned goff course, housing in Hacienda Business Park, and additional housing on the County Fairgrounds property, that may come to pass if the City accepts the San Francisco propony development. She urged nonacceptance of this project and feels the citizens would join in the battle. She asked not to give up the propony to such a large development project and suggested the use of legal measures if necessary. Tom Bacon, 432 St. Mary Street, spoke about the uniqueness of the soil of this property, citing a UC Davis study that catego~zed it as some of the finest soil in California and the United States. If Pleasanton financed to purchase the land, he suggested that a minor league-type baseball park/stadium be built on the portion of the land to pay for its purchase. He also suggested that the land be offered in small parcels for lease to the universities for research or to individuals for organic farming. David Spear, 489 Adams Way, believes that the diverse ideas presented by citizens are indications that the people are not happy with the property development process. Issues to be addressed are traffic mitigation and sewer capacity. He inquired if the San Francisco property were put to a vote of the citizens, how could it be expanded to the entire County. He urged the Council to look at all other possibilities for this propony. Mr. Tarver asked for a show of hands of those in the audience who agreed with the speaker's comments. Mr. Tarver also noted that in Alameda County, there would need to be collected approximately 60,000 signatures to referendum a County action. Barton Stillman, 2934 Killcare Rd., Sunol, stated that the subject property was obtained 35 years ago with federal money and federal planning; he now questions whether the government would approve of the Water District exploiting its holdings with gravel quarries, Pleasure Faires, etc. He thought the land was for the Spring Valley aquifer. He feels the land was held for speculation. He also spoke to the Water District's attempts to put in gravel quarries and destroy the Sunol Water Temple. He would like to see figures regarding the potential income from sales taxes, property taxes, etc. to the City of San Francisco and Pleasanton, as well as costs to the cities. Mr. Stillman wants the governance of the proposed facilities be worked out in detail. He also feels the City of San Francisco should be asked what its future development plans are for this area. 12/11/95 - 4 - City Council Minutes