01 6-26-2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Council to make interpretations that will allow development. She asked the Council not to delay the process in writing another Initiative which will take time and during the delay, approvals will be sought to bulldoze trees and hills and she asked not to let this happen. She asked for a moratorium on hillside development until people can vote. Karla Brown spoke on behalf of all three authors of the Initiative. She said the initiative is not Kay Ayala's alone but that Ms. Ayala one of many who want to protect Pleasanton's quality of life. She clarified that the intent of the Initiative is to protect hills from development, direct development away from lands with environmentally sensitive features or with primary open space values, and to make the General Plan's definition of a housing unit consistent with the federal and state definitions. She quoted portions of the staff report the proponents agree with, believed there was no need for the Council to place a competing Initiative on the ballot and asked for their Initiative to stand on its own for residents to decide. She provided a letter to the City Clerk identifying those portions of the of the staff report that the proponents agree with. Councilmember Sullivan confirmed with Ms. Brown that the intent of the Initiative is to control construction of residential and commercial structures and not roads that may be on 25% slope and leads to the conclusion that the intent of the initiative is not to preclude construction of the Happy Valley Bypass Road.. Mayor Hosterman questioned how something like an extended stay hotel would be counted. Ms. Seto said many of those types of commercial facilities have microwaves, stoves, and bathrooms which would arguably fall under the Initiative's definition of a housing unit, but staff's practice has not been to count them. Steve Brozosky spoke regarding direct access to policymaking processes through the initiative and the referendum process, and quoted the Chair for the Speaker's Commission on the California Initiative process. He said the Council-sponsored Initiative was voted on in 1996 and asked voters to accept a housing unit cap, but there was no definition of what a housing unit was. He said as a school board member, the information about the school district fees was categorically incorrect as well as multi-family houses and impacts and he asked to let the citizen's Initiative stand on its own. Brian Arkin questioned whether the poison pill aspect could only affect the hillside and not the housing cap aspect. He also believed that the records show that developers have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on three Council campaigns collectively, and he asked the Council to say no to the competing Initiative. Dolores Bengston said 80% of the City's open space is in farmland and parks, spoke of her work in saving trees and environmental work, is against the Initiative, and it troubles her that the stakeholders do not have input and the authors added a section that provides a more strict definition of a housing unit. She said the Initiative is not good law, believes everyone is sincere in their desire to make Pleasanton a better place to live, and suggested including residents and other stakeholders the opportunity to participate in a task force to consider new regulations for hillside development which would result in responsible, fair and environmentally sound guidelines. John Butera said one thing not addressed is the current economy, property values, revenues, and taxes, spoke regarding airport safety and encroaching development, and cited recent fire Special Meeting Minutes 10 June 26, 2008