CCMIN032001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Ayala asked if he were aware of the new school fees and asked if he had signed the new agreement. Mr. Bates said not yet, because they had no project at that time. He indicated New Cities was willing to sign the new agreement. Ms. Dennis asked if there was agreement with the neighbors that are not part of the PUD? Mr. Bates said there are conditions in the PUD that require various things such as lot line adjustments, etc. Ms. Dennis asked if all the agreements could be part of the approval, so city staff could monitor them. Mr. Bates felt all the agreements are in the conditions. Ms. McKeehan felt that sometimes there are promises or commitments made that the City is unaware of and any commitments made to neighbors should be part of City approvals so the City is aware of them. Mr. Bates referred to an agreement with Gwynn Lock that New Cities would grant an easement and would bring water and sewer to her property. Those are in the vesting tentative map conditions. Those agreements are waiting for signature. Ms. Dennis said her point is that these agreements are important for the neighborhood to be comfortable with the project and she just wanted them all consolidated. Linda Butler, 1141 Lund Ranch Road, said she lives adjacent to the development. She was a member of the steering committee for the North Sycamore Neighborhood Association. She did not want to eliminate the annexation requirement. The City staff, the neighbors, Planning Commission and City Council spent two and a half years to reach a final decision on the New Cities project; why change it now? The only beneficiary would be the developer. She believed the current infrastructure is inadequate. Intersections are inadequate, the schools are overcrowded, power supplies are inadequate, and freeway and city traffic is a nightmare. She felt the only reason this project was approved was due to its ties to the golf course. The decision to approve development must be weighed against the benefit to the city residents. It is socially responsible to curb the ever-increasing demands placed on the City's infrastructure and when appropriate to exercise caution in decision making regarding the delecate balance between City amenities and development. There were many considerations in the process regarding New Cities, including the relationship to the golf course and the quality of life for the residents of Pleasanton. She saw no benefit to the people of Pleasanton to remove the Pleasanton City Council 15 03/20/01 Minutes