CCMIN082100 - Laserfiche WebLink

Transportation Subcommittee of the General Plan Review Committee. A prior speaker said if the 11900 homes are not built bere, they will have to be built somewhere else. She did not remember that as being in the General Plan. She did not care if there is a golf course, but preferred to see that instead of offices or houses. She felt this was a generous proposal and she did not want 1,900 houses on that property. Jack Hovingh, expressed his appreciation for the remarks of Ms. Dennis. He liked the concept of alleys to get to garages for some of the houses and liked the ability to have low income housing. He also liked the through-walkways through the office buildings. He would like to have a gas station in this location. He commented that Pleasanton has the highest priced gasoline of the entire srea. Finally he liked having 280 acres of open space for the City. However, he was concemed about the cost of developing the public lands. He was concerned about the possibility of a parcel tax to pay for improvements. He did not like having 745,000 sq. ft. of office space and felt it exacerbated thejob/housing imbalance. He was concerned about the additional funding necessary tbr the 3,000 additional low income housing units that will be required. The only way to cover that is to have a graduated transfer tax on transfers involving expeasive homes, Finally, he suggested changing offices to housing. We could get 300 more homes and would have no bigger impact on traffic than offices. He suggest building the affordable low and very low income housing and the service station before the last of the houses. When you get big houses in first, the residents will not want low income housing there. Duets and small lots should be desi~aed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act standards. Lastly, he would like the FAR for all lots to be no more than 33%. Valefie Hurst, 3593 Arbor Court, wanted the western parcel changed. She believed the green bu/'fer will become part of the development and not for the rest of the people of Pleasanton. Berms are too costly to maintain and there should be soundwalls. She believed the City shotrid go forward with the golf course due to the retention ponds and waterways of this property. She felt there were three options: either develop a golf course or refuse transfer of any land from the western parcel and the homeowners can maintain the open space; or move the houses closer to the freeway and make a bigger green space on the western edge to have a zigzag golf course. She believed that would also aid flood control. She felt the City should let the deal fall through. There is not enough housing on this development. This property is prime property for affordable housing for people in the $200,000 to $499,000 price range. According to the Golden Valley Report only 40% of police and tim personnel live in the Tri-Valley and 61% of the teachers. If we fully develop this property to 2,600 units with a mix of housing, we would help provide housing for the 8,000 jobs in the immediate area. This high density development would impact the fewest neighborhoods and provide vitality to the downtown. It would provide lbr the forgotten majority. These people will not bend the cars of Councilmcmbers because they don't live here. Council need to match jobs to cost of housing. She suggested petitioning the Attorney General to find out if the State of California is going to enforce housing laws and exert pressure on San Jose to provide housing or are we going to continue to shove housing into the Central Valley? There are many freedoms in this country and overcrowding is the result of two basic freedoms: the Pleasanton City Council 9 08/21/00 Minutes