01.1 - Laserfiche WebLink

the $1 million will be spent is unclear, they would like to consult with an attorney regarding the impacts on their neighborhood on the development agreement. John Butera discussed the true effect of a lens and felt the pictures presented by the developer were laughable, said the people who will buy the homes are buying it for a view, felt what needs to be done is a reality check because the entire state of California is running out of and fighting for water, cited the many droughts and felt the existing water system should be protected for Pleasanton's current residents. Donald Collin Baker opposed the project, said he is disappointed in the so-called good faith community meetings held with the developers, cited tree impacts, visual impacts, the locations of large home sites, traffic impacts, felt the small residential street is not intended to support a park, short term construction impacts, long term traffic of horse trailers, bicyclists, hikers, and loitering at the end of Hearst Drive doing illegal activities. Howard Neely said the only problem he sees is the need for a second access and the best part of the project is the open space and a great trail system and disagrees with putting a light at Kottinger. Carolyn Newton said her main concern is fire safety and response times. Jon Harvey said he was part of the team who tried to reach a consensus in the neighborhood on the project; felt as the process drags out it makes it more difficult to maintain that kind of consensus and felt the Council was in a very difficult position due to its controversy. If the project is approved, he would like to see some significant water reduction and conservation measures applied to each of the homes. Mike Regan said he has been around 3.5 years discussing the project on a number of facets, it is a complex issue, the Council has said this is an opportunity to put the south border on the south Pleasanton Hills and preserve that in perpetuity and he wanted to put the project together that makes the most sense and will protect the hills. He felt the property should be protected not only by having an Oak Grove development, but potentially a development beyond Oak Grove because there is nothing to say this can't continue forever. Bing Hadley said he was recently misquoted in the newspaper as saying, although many people in Kottinger Ranch would probably like to see no homes built in these hills, we believe the compromise reached is agreeable to all, and this is not what he said. He said the development plan is not perfect; however, it represents true compromise and meets the needs of the Lin's, their neighbors and the City of Pleasanton, and not everyone agrees. He said the majority of homeowners agree that the compromised path that they have gone down was and is the right thing to do. The Kottinger Ranch Board unanimously approved the formation of the southeast hills preservation committee in 2003 and appointed Mike Regan and John Harvey to the committee. He highlighted the committees work and said they have been very consistent throughout the process with their message, and the big picture is sealing up the boundary on Pleasanton. Kay Ayala said she felt the process for this project has not worked. She indicated regarding how to make the southern boundary stick, there is an urban growth boundary that was voted on during the last General Plan, which called for a development of a ridgeline preservation ordinance. This Council can put together an ordinance, put it on the ballot and let the people vote on whether the hills will be protected. She said all the Council needs is one policy that violates the General Plan and she read those that violate the plan. She felt the Council needs to uphold the Planning Commission's denial and said the developer has no legal right to come City Council Minutes 16 October 2, 2007