Laserfiche WebLink
projects in the pipeline. The Council will significantly reduce the opportunity it has that he <br />believes is a true TOD project at Hacienda. <br />Secondly, regarding the planning aspects of this, there is a large opportunity along I-580 with <br />two BART stations to look at this as a transportation corridor and how to best utilize both BART <br />stations, future bus and rapid transit to East Dublin to ACE and take advantage of the situation. <br />Therefore, he believed the Council should review this opportunity from a comprehensive <br />standpoint and take a step back. He believed this project should be folded into the Hacienda <br />Task Force process and see how the City can best maximize the opportunity for TOD to deal <br />with problems, provide affordable housing, and minimize our carbon footprint. He thought the <br />project is attractive, thinks the affordable housing component is needed, the retail attempt is <br />good, but he is also afraid that because of its location, the neighborhood will be wedged <br />between a BART station and a mall and isolated from the rest of the community. He did not <br />believe the project was truly a TOD development because it is not totally walkable and the <br />Council should look at the bigger picture. He did not believe the project will work as a <br />demonstration project and what will happen is the City will allow it as a transit adjacent <br />development; the City will run out of units and squander the opportunity at Hacienda, and said <br />he cannot support moving forward. <br />Mayor Hosterman acknowledged Councilmember Sullivan's discussion about numbers, but in <br />talking about SMART growth and TOD and all of the variables that go into making it work, are <br />things the Council will be discussing for a future project at Hacienda Business Park. If the City <br />puts together a project at the higher densities and pieces together a project that looks and fits <br />Pleasanton which reduces a carbon footprint which is walkable, she thinks this could be put <br />together and taken to the voters who would embrace it. She did not believe it made sense not <br />proceeding with this type of development because we would be fearful of being in risk for losing <br />an opportunity for another good project. <br />Councilmember Sullivan said his goal is to do something good within the limits of the housing <br />cap which he believes could be done. Regarding not approving this and waiting for another <br />opportunity is planning and making decisions on what is important for the community, and he <br />did not think this was being done in this situation. <br />Councilmember McGovern voiced concerns about Hacienda Business Park, said it was built for <br />a certain capacity with its infrastructure, it has 2 million square feet of development left to <br />accomplish and she was looking at something comparable to this project there, and hoped the <br />City can make the project pedestrian-friendly with some moderate affordability. <br />Motion: It was m/s by Thorne/McGovern to adopt Resolution No. 08-239 approving a General <br />Plan Amendment for the application of Windstar Communities, Inc. as filed under case PGPA- <br />13; adopt Resolution No. 08-240 approving a Negative Declaration for the application of <br />Windstar Communities, Inc., as filed under case PUD-62/PGPA-13; and introduce and waive full <br />reading of Ordinance No. 1983 approving the application of Windstar Communities, Inc. for <br />PUD Zoning and Development Plan approval, as filed under Case PUD-62 with the added <br />conditions: 1) that the developer would make every attempt to secure affordable housing within <br />the moderate income category; 2) upon completion of the 90 year ground lease, BART and/or <br />Windstar and/or Caltrans shall be required to assume or re-negotiate the affordable housing <br />requirements of the project; 3) that BART, Windstar or Caltrans would need to develop a plan <br />that mitigates the impact of the potential flyover to a level that retains all vehicles within the <br />property. The plan would be developed and funded if the final flyover design has an impact on <br />the proposed development; 4) the developer would consult with the City's landscape architect to <br />ensure that the project landscaping is consistent with the existing Stoneridge Mall properties <br />Council Meeting Minutes 7 September 16, 2008 <br />