PC 03/24/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Barker agreed with Mr. Gill that the customers are not being served. She noted her dissatisfaction with staff in that information she requested in February regarding the comparative return on different types of land was not received until this evening. She stated that the Planning Commission needs more time to analyze information regarding commercial/office and residential taxes. She agrees that there needs to be better customer service and that this will also benefit the development community, as they will know what to expect and what the people will buy. She stated that the east side study is a great way to make everything known, up-front, as to what the residents will accept. She feels landowners should participate, but that Ponderosa should not have a stake in this. She believes that it is important for people to get together and have honest citizen input and dialogue, and that the committee should not have a consultant that will "railroad" the committee. She believes that the "chain-of-lakes", the airport, and the possibility of an additional school needs to be considered. She stated that it needs to be a general plan level study. She commented that she favors Option 3 with regard to the area to be studied, noting that she feels the Trenery area has been planned very well. She feels that cross-town traffic needs to be addressed and that the change in the school situation, alone, during the last three years, warrants a study. Commissioner Wright stated that he would have preferred to have voted on this item tonight. He noted that he does not feel that any type of a study is warranted. He stated that the Busch property proposal met every portion of the General Plan. He does not believe one can say that the General Plan is flawed because things have changed. He noted that he believes that with the time that was spent on the General Plan and the number of citizens involved, he feels it was definitely representative of anybody and everybody. He noted that the Busch property was in the old General Plan and reviewed in the new General Plan, and nothing really changed regarding the use on that property. He stated that the original proposal had the two accesses for the development to be to the south, but that one of the accesses could not be done because of the safety issue. He noted that he believes Pleasanton has always been well-planned and the criteria for the circulation pattern has always been that the more entrances and exits you have, the more relief you have because there are more choices and you are not funneling traffic in one direction. He stated that the referendum was due to impacts, supposedly, to the people in the Mohr/Maztin azea and their concerns about traffic. He noted that he understands people from all over town signing the referendum because of their concern for the quality of life of others, but he believes the issues should stay with the neighbors in that specific area and the developer; therefore, it does not need to be revisited. Commissioner Wright stated that he does not believe the Staples Ranch area needs to be revisited. He noted that the traffic study shows that the cut-through traffic is minuscule. He believes that this brings the matter back to a conflict between the residents and the developer. He stated that if the developer has changed, it may be possible to resolve differences through conversations with the residents. He noted that the Staples Ranch development will provide a pazk, without floating a bond. Commissioner Wright stated that he does not see any reason to review the quarry property, in that the representatives have stated that they have no long term plans other than harvesting gravel on these sites. Commissioner Wright summarized by saying that the differences regarding the Busch property should be worked out between the neighbors and the developer, and the differences regazding the Staples Ranch property should be worked out between the residents and the developer. He stated that he believes the General Plan was more than representative of the community and that it is a good general plan. He commented that the specific plan which is in place should take care of issues regarding traffic circulation, etc. He noted that development has provided amenities that bring people to this town. He - stated that he does not feel that any of these issues need to be reviewed and that these matters should be resolved on a party-to-party basis. Planning Commission Minutes Page 11 March 24, 1998