CCMIN090799 - Laserfiche WebLink

report states five good reasons not to have a study and indicated a sixth reason was that the Nolans have been working on this project for over a year to bring it before Council. There was a rezoning of the property in January which held off presentation of the current plan. The Planning Commission will review the plan on September 22. If a study is required, it will deny the Nolans the opportunity to have their property before Council in a timely manner. Beatrice Nolan, 1027 Rose Avenue, opposed a study for Rose Avenue. There have been many changes in the 40 years she has lived there, including construction of a condominium, two apartment complexes, a trailer park, duplexes, a preschool and homes. Until now, there has never been a request for a study. Her property will have homes built on it that will complement the City of Pleasanton. The development will provide easy access to downtown, public transportation, parks, etc. She said there have been many opportunities to sell this property and build. Their children are grown and have families and she and her husband feel it is time to get their estate in order while they can still handle it. The application was filed prior to the CAPP Initiative but they have been delayed for various reasons by the City. She said they have complied with all the requirements of the City and believed this was what the City wants for this area. Rick Pickering, Manager of the Alameda County Fairgrounds, presented an update on the planning process for the Fairgrounds. It has started a master plan and environmental impact report process. He anticipates this will be at least a twelve-month process to review the 266 acres with regard to current and future uses. The issue of the Rose Avenue extension will be addressed in this process. The key issue is whether Rose Avenue goes through, what alignment and who pays for it. The Fair Board did not support the Braddock and Logan proposal because of its effect on Rose Avenue. The Fair Board is neutral on the issue at hand. The Nolans have been wonderful neighbors. Ms. Ayala asked if parameters had been set for the master plan. She asked if all the hearings will be at the County offices or will there be a hearing in Pleasanton? Mr. Pickering indicated a scope of work has not yet been set. There is still discussion of who will pay for the EIR. He invited the City to participate with the County in discussions on the scope of work. He stressed that any suggestions of land use must be considered in light of feasibility. He said it is possible to have a hearing at the Fairgrounds and Council is entitled to make that request. Ms. Pico asked if housing was considered on this property. Mr. Pickering believed them were stipulations in the deed for the land in the event the Fair ceases. He has no intention of doing away with the County Fair. Mr. Tarver asked if he was familiar with the conditions about who controls the land use when it is not related to Fair activities. Pleasanton City Council 15 09/07/99 Meeting