CCMIN080487 - Laserfiche WebLink

263 growth figures vs. "Continued Surge" growth. She stated the school funding mechanism is cumbersome, complicated and lengthy; the time period may require 5 to 7 years. She added that communities are judged by the quality of educa- tion their schools offer and the adequacy of the facilities. She asked that Council adopt a limit of no more than 650 units per year. She stated there is a need for long range careful planning with moderate growth. Councilmember Mohr asked if the school impact fees are sufficient. Ms. Blinn advised these provide only approximately one-third of the funds needed. Mr. Martin Inderbitzen, 62 W. Neal Street, representing the Chamber of Commerce, spoke regarding the issue of phasing the San Francisco property. The point that general plans are intended to implement area-wide policies have to be considered very well; the phasing issue on specific pieces of property will be considered at the time of development plan approval. If Council does implement phasing in the general plan it will lose flexibility when dealing with property, i.e., opportunity to take advantage of parks, school, roads, etc. He stated the proposal is redundant; the only thing the phasing of specific pieces of property will tell is whether or not you can or cannot have growth on that land, and there are no significant parcels of land that need that kind of enforcing. The San Francisco property is an island within the City and it would be appropriate to allow planning to take place and phasing in the specific plan process. Ms. Linda Ebright, 3596 Touriga Drive, stated that everyone is affected by how the City grows and its impact on schools. She is concerned about exces- sive growth. She stated that schools which cannot be built because of the time consuming process of getting money from the State affects people and their way of life; school are overcrowded and the quality of Pleasanton will not be what it is wanted to be. She stated the School District cannot respond to surge growth, and there is a time lag to get buildings completed. She urged Council to carefully consider school needs and problems when planning the City's growth. Mr. John Steinbush, 638 Abbie, addressing the commercial real estate market, stated that the developers and City have worked hard to develop an outstanding business park. He advised that Pleasanton is the business alter- native for businesses locating in the Bay area; however, the market is still competitive and the City has to have some positive aspects. He stated the issue that concerns him is a cap of 62,000 population. He stated the user community will find that the City does not want growth and, therefore, will not locate in Pleasanton. He added this is ,lot consistent with prior approv- als. He stated there should not be a limit on housing; the business people will feel undermined. He urged Council not to adopt a population cap. Ms. Sandra DeBias, 7923 Raccoon Hallow Court, stated that Elk Grove schools are overcrowded and have signs posted that "new students may be bussed to other schools". She stated that Pleasanton schools do not have signs yet but they are congested. She added that adequate school facilities do affect the entire community including those who market homes. She advised that schools have to be 10% overcrowded before applying for State funding, which then can take from 5 to 7 years to receive. Ms. Cindy McGovern, 9206 Longview Drive, stated there is a new law which allows parents to bring children to school in the city where they work; this could add more students in Pleasanton schools. She expressed concern regard- ing adequate sewage capacity and the Gann spending limit which might hinder - 8 - 8-4-87