PC 03/24/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Lazry Appleton, 3000 Busch Road, represented Kaiser Sand and Gravel. Mr. Appleton stated that there is no reason to include the Kaiser property in the study as Kaiser has not made any proposal to develop its property and does not want to be included in the study. He stated that it was his intention to volunteer to be involved if there was to be a study, but from what he has heard thus far he would be volunteering to sit in front of a "kangaroo court." His recommendation at this point would be rather than to have a citizen's committee, have the Planning Commission do its own study if it chooses to do so. He commented that he believes Option 4.a. is the best and should include Kaiser/Busch, and Kiewit, and the industrial azea southwest of Valley Avenue. He stated that he would like to see the issues identified, and that there is no reason to include Staples Ranch. He would also like to see a definite timeframe established, so that the study does not go on for yeazs and yeazs. He assumes that Kaiser will have developing rights if it ever wants to develop; however, right now, Kaiser does not want to. He stated that Kiewit wants to protect its industrial interests and its representative had expressed interest in being included in the study group. Commissioner Barker stated that she appreciates the value of Kiewit and Kaiser Sand and Gravel to the community. She asked if the Kaiser property adjacent to the Busch property would be developed as a sports park. Mr. Appleton responded that Kaiser does not have this intention. He noted that this azea is in the airport protection azea and that residential development cannot be built there, but industrial development could be located there and it could also be a pazk. Chair Cooper stated that he would like Kaiser to be part of the process and that the owners should be involved. Mr. Appleton stated that he would reject any plan where he would not have equal rights with everyone else on the committee and where he has no development rights. Commissioner Barker was concerned that staff has always said the Kaiser property would be a park. However, since Kaiser has no intention of placing a park here„ the City should make a pazk happen on its own instead of waiting for Kaiser. The City needs to work with the sports groups to accomplish this. Peter Cohen, 1602 Martin Avenue, addressed two comments made at the last hearing. First, Chair Cooper stated that there appears to be a political will to undertake this study, but it is hard to image that any realistic outcome will be all that different from what we already have. Mr. Cohen stated that basically he agrees with that statement. He noted that in talking with immediate neighbors there is no support for light industrial. There are probably some minor changes that could be made along the lines of the sports park that Commissioner Bazker mentioned, but there is the question of who will pay for it. Mr. Cohen stated that we aze probably looking at medium density residential again. He noted that the General Plan Steering Committee looked at five different land use options in 1995 and he presented copies of the minutes from those meetings. He noted that he felt the main failing of the General Plan Steering Committee was that it was made up of members who were not residents of the neighborhoods affected by the outcome of the planning for the Busch property. Mr. Cohen advised that the second item he wished to address was that Commissioner Barker mentioned that the Growth Management Committee was basically packed with developers and did not fully represent the needs and feelings of the population of Pleasanton. He agreed that caze needs to be taken in how the group that does this study is constructed. He noted that caution should also be given to not packing the committee with no-growth people. He stated that the City Attorney needs to be involved so that the Committee is aware of legal implications and potential risks to the City. He stated that 80% of the study group should be residents of the azea that is being studied and if there is a Staples Ranch study there should be a separate subcommittee for the Staples Ranch azea and one for the Busch property. He feels membership should - be done by application to the City Council noting qualifications and potential contributions to the study. There should be a consultant facilitator. The group structure needs to be defined and it needs to be Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 March 24, 1998