CCMIN110883 - Laserfiche WebLink

·" " 473 Mayor Butler declared the public hearing open on the two items. Mr. Jack Swanson, representing Prudential Insurance Company of America and Callahan-Pentz Properties, presented a slide show regarding progress Of the Hacienda Business Park in the last four years. He specifically addressed noise control, traffic improvements, flood control improvements, and air quality monitoring. Mr. Craig Davey, Appraiser, Cushman Wakefield Associates, San Francisco, ad- dressed the economic considerations, stating that decreased density will increase rent fees and place the already approved assessment in jeopardy. He reviewed several of the alternatives which he felt would adversely affect the desirability of the project. Mr. Joe Callahan, Callahan-Pentz Properties, stated that after conversations with representatives of the General Plan Review Steering Committee relative to time of implementation of mitigation measures associated with LOS E, as well as percent of intersection capacity, there still seemed to be confusion. He requested that the following two modifications be added to the general plan amendment and the PUD appli- cation: Supplement to City Council of the City of Pleasanton resolution - 1. Add to Exhibit A, Significant Effects and Findings~ Section Section XII. B: b.3 Fact. Under this alternative, more Pleasanton workers would commute to Pleasanton. There would almost certainly be a lower jobs/housing index, i.e. more jobs- than housing. The existing General Plan Review Committee is currently con- sidering the ramifications of commercial and industrial development in addi- tion to the approved projects. Proposals for additional development will be considered, with appropriate environmental review after that process is com- pleted. ~. c.4 Fact. Due to existing general plan policies the annual residential growth rate may not exceed 2%. Supplement to City Council of the City of Pleasanton ordinance - 1. Add to Exhibit A, Significant Effects and Findings~ Section Section XII. B: b.3 Fact. Under this alternative, more Pleasanton workers would commute to Pleasanton. There would almost certainly be a lower jobs/housing index, i.e. more jobs than housing. The existing General Plan Review Committee is currently con- sidering the ramifications of commercial and industrial development in addi- tion to the approved projects. Proposals for additional development will be considered, with appropriate environmental review after that process is com- pleted. c.4 Fact. Due to existing general plan policies the annual residential growth rate may not exceed 2%. 5. 1l/8/83