CCMIN121195 - Laserfiche WebLink

to live in Pleasanton. He further commented that if the affordable housing is not built in the Valley, it will continue to impact the freeway infrastructure to the San Joaquin Valley. He also stated his desire that the affordable housing not be limited to senior citizens. Mr. Hovingh also recommended that the East Bay Regional Park District not be a part of this development plan and suggested the City purchase acreage in the Sierras to develop a City Camp. Gene Finch, 8019 lorgensen Lane, inquired why there is such a rush to develop this property. He feels the three agencies have worked very well together, but is concerned about the business/retail being proposed. He is opposed to retail along Bernal and wants only one- story retail construction. He is concerned about the additional traffic generated. Mr. Finch does not see the need for a second hotel zoning in this area. He also feels there should be time lines established when projects are approved. He feels this will mitigate people's concern about growth. Simon Cohen, 6386 Beech Court, reiterated his desire to keep Pleasanton's "small town' character. He also inquired if there has been an assessment made of the property's value. Ms. Acosta advised that a study had been commissioned and would be released in a few weeks. Mr. Cohen then inquired what amount of money San Francisco needs to profit by developing this property. Rick Nelson responded to the question of why there is a rush to develop this parcel. San Francisco has been at this process for years, starting in 1960. Subsequent events did not allow the property' s development, however, San Francisco feels it has been very patient in developing this land. Regarding the profit per acre questions, it isn't known if a profit will be made, citing incorrect market studies, changing markets, economic downturns, and many other things that are out of their control. Mayor Tarvet then inquired if San Francisco would, to eliminate the above risks, sell the property to Pleasanton and at what price. Mr. Nelson advised that Pleasanton staff has looked at that question and could better advise of the impacts. Contrary to an earlier statement, this property was not bought with Federal money. To the question of glare and maintenance on the see-through soundwalls, Mr. Nelson advised that there needs to be more investigation into that idea. The idea was an attempt to mitigate public concern about losing view corridors. Regarding the access to the community park from the PleasanWn Middle School and what precautionary measures were taken for the railroad tracks, a fence similar to that used at Pleasanton Middle School would be constructed in the community park along the railroad tracks. Efforts may be made to mitigate noise as well. 12/11/95 - 7 - City Council Minutes