CCMIN021704 - Laserfiche WebLink

Leon Hunt, 1327 Benedict Court, mentioned that he moved to Kottinger Ranch due to the quality and safety of the neighborhood with minimal traffic. As a resident, he was concerned about the outcome of the development of Kottinger Hills, which will affect the residents. If the outcome of the process makes his neighborhood in any way less than what is was when he moved into it, the City, Council and the residents have failed. As part of this process, he urged Council to consider its existing residents and the people that have moved to Pleasanton who have made it what it is today and preserve it for the existing residents. Julie Rasnick, 1246 Hearst Drive, concurred with the previous speakers' comments. Bing Hadley, 1210 Hearst Drive, President of the Kottinger Ranch Homeowners Association, urged Council to follow the General Plan process with regard to all development. He noted that there are a precious few number of properties that are left to make important, long-term decisions. He encouraged Council to stay on this path and not circumvent or fast track it. Karla Brown-Belcher, 1326 Benedict Court, said she was concerned that the workshop would cause extra costs to the community. She was against the development of Kottinger Hills and additional building, and agreed that the General Plan should be the guide. Matt Sullivan, 7882 Flagstone Drive, member of the Planning Commission and the Chair of the Energy Committee, voiced his concerns related to the process and what would be the goal. He asked if the goal was to save the developer money for the costs associated with an EIR and a lengthy planning process? Is it to save the neighbors much heartache and energy to stay involved over the same time period, and potentially, put together another referendum? Is it to save work for the various commissions and staff by eliminating unnecessary work? Is the goal to give the applicant an indication of an acceptable project or project that would meet City Council's approval up front? He believed this would set expectations on the developer's part and, essentially, take the public, the Planning Commission and all other commissions out of the loop. He noted that the developer of Lund Ranch II asked for a similar workshop and received direction from the City Council. Whether or not the Council intended to give the developers direction, the developers came back with a project with additional units, which was even less acceptable to the community, and placed the Planning Commission in a bigger hole as it goes through the General Plan update process. He did not know how a City Council could provide direction on a project up front when it did not know all of the impacts. He suggested a parallel process in order to try and get some kind of acceptable project in parallel with the existing General Plan process. He believed it had some merits and might work, but it would also be based on the assumption that a project can be achieved that is acceptable to all parties which, based on what he has heard at the General Plan community meetings and comments made this evening, may be difficult. He recommended that Council hesitate in providing the developer direction so that the public would be given the oppommity to provide input. He also suggested that Council be Pleasanton City Council 8 02/17/04 Minutes