CCMIN030299 - Laserfiche WebLink

Brian Arkin, 3740 Newton Way, felt there was an imbalance between the current rate of construction and the infrastructure to support the construction. The schools are already overcrowded, the traffic is continually getting worse and the water supply is being overburdened. He asked Council to rescind the ordinance and slow down growth to give the infrastructure a chance to catch up. He said the residents of Pleasanton deserve better and until the traffic, water supply, and schools improve, the City Council should not approve any more developments. Matt Morrison, 5581-A Sonoma Drive, had concerns with the water supply. He did not support using reverse osmosis in order to supply water because of an increased demand caused by development. He urged Council to rescind its vote and would like to see a moratorium on new and approved housing developments. He approved of the CAPP initiative and that developers should state their case. He believed this should not go to the vote of the people, that Council should rescind the ordinance and see how the CAPP initiative plays out. He said the residents want to have more control over the quality of life. Matt Sullivan, 4324 Muirwood Drive, said this is the second time within a year that the residents have put together a referendum to overturn City Council's development approvals. The impacts have been the same for both projects, negative impacts on neighborhoods, increasing traffic and overcrowded schools. The final straw was the insensitivity of the Council to the residents' concerns. He collected signatures for both referenda and said the overwhelming view of residents is that growth is occurring too rapidly with too many negative impacts. The public is confused by a City Council (except for Mr. Pico and Mayor Tarver) that represents itself as slow growth but continues to approve development projects. He asked why the City Council continues to approve these projects despite the objections of the residents? He said the residents could trust the elected officials to make the decisions or take matters into their own hands. The residents have spoken with the referendum and initiative process. On a regional scale the Citizens Alliance for Public Planning have developed an initiative, which will put the public in the role of a development decision-maker. He asked Council to rescind its approval of this project and start over to do it right. If not, put it to the vote of the people, where he believed it would receive overwhelming support. Glenn Strahl, 3928 Fernwood Way, said as he was gathering signatures he made it a point to tell people that the referendum was for limited growth. He said most of the people signed the petitions before he could explain what it was about. He was not going to argue what the Council should do, but felt the referendum would be overwhelming supported at an election. Carole Varela, 3858 Mohr Avenue, said with all the comments that have been made that it was sad the residents still had to initiate the referendum process. She could not understand why the Council was not listening to the residents. She asked what else it would take to get the Council to listen. The residents have spoken with two referenda and the initiative process. She did not believe this should go to the ballot and cost the taxpayers money, when the Council should know what the outcome would be. She asked Council to rescind the ordinance and make Pleasanton City Council 17 03/02/99 Minutes