CCMIN080999 - Laserfiche WebLink

input from the neighbors. He listed changes made to the plan in order to comply with the requests made by the neighbors; and 4) that this project was twice rejected from the Planning Commission and that New Cities is trying to avoid the vote on the CAPP initiative by piggy backing onto the golf course project. He reiterated again that the project is consistent with the North Sycamore Specific Plan. New Cities started working on this project over two years ago when the CAPP initiative was not even an issue. He felt it was important for good planning to use the Specific Plan process. In regards to the school issue, he said the project would pay a school mitigation fee. The School District has over $17 million from developer fees in the bank and the State will match the sum at the time the District builds new schools. He pointed out that over half of the growth in the schools is a result of sales of existing homes to families. Therefore, new development in the city should not be held hostage on growth or development of the School District. In conclusion he felt this project should be approved or the North Sycamore Specific Plan should be revised. Ms. Dennis asked if New Cities initiated the discussion on the development agreement. Mr. Bates said he did not understand why the application had been continued originally. He said Roger Manning contacted him and said the City was trying to resolve the annexation issue with the people in the Happy Valley area. Mr. Manning indicated that the people in the Happy Valley area were opposed to the water and sewer costs. Mr. Manning proposed that the costs be paid by the developers, therefore a meeting was set up between New Cities, the Sportono, and TTK Developers. Following this meeting a letter was sent to the City stating the proposal. Ms. Ayala asked what lots split the green belt area and asked him to point out Lots 34 and 35. Mr. Bates showed on a map lots 34 and 35 and said lot Number 30 split the green belt. He said lots 34 and 35 would be consolidated to form one lot. The Planning Department suggested using the lots for drainage purposes. New Cities proposed using drains that tie into a storm drain. Ms. Ayala asked if the storm drain would be able to handle the capacity. Mr. Bates said the project reduces the amount of water that will be going towards the other ditches. Mr. Swift said the sheet flow drainage that currently reaches the creek would be intercepted by either the streets or lots and delivered to a storm drain located in Vantana Hills. Ms. Ayala asked if this resolved the Vantana Hills storm drain problem. Mr. Swift said the biggest drainage issue is with the Lund property. The placement of the storm drain will help eliminate this problem. Gary Sabo, 1138 Lund Ranch Road, felt the development should be postponed to allow more time to address the issues. Pleasanton City Council 4 08/09/99 Minutes