CCMIN092099 - Laserfiche WebLink

open space. Almost all those open space parcels came from activism of people who wanted to preserve them. This community has a history of environmental activism including an unsuccessful referendum of the Hacienda Business Park, preserving Pleasanton Ridge, General Plan reviews and an urban limit line. She has been thinking about the CAPP (Citizens Alliance for Public Planning) Initiative. It is well-intentioned to give the people of Pleasanton the right to vote without having to circulate a referendum on each and every significant change of zoning and major residential development. However, she believed it does the opposite. To her CAPP stands for County Approved Pleasanton Projects. The major properties that CAPP addresses are Staples Ranch, San Francisco Water Department Bernal Property, Busch property and the Merrit Property. They are the major holes in Pleasanton's Swiss cheese. They are all unincorporated Alameda County properties. They currently have rights with Alameda County to develop their property. Pleasanton has been working with the property owners to develop their property in Pleasanton, so that Pleasanton has the right to plan, approve and if necessary referend any project. CAPP basically tells the developers to go to Alameda County if they want to develop their property because it will be much easier. Some will, and Pleasanton will have little or no control over the development. If you have seen the development north of 580 between Castro Valley and Dublin, you have seen some idea of past County developments; or even Eastern Dublin or the County proposal for 2,500 units on the San Francisco property. There is no County-wide CAPP initiative. She works in Oakland and San Leandro and she used to work in Hayward and Fremont. Her experience is that the people in urbanized Alameda County have little or no sympathy with our growth control initiatives. In Alameda County, business will be as usual. If we approve CAPP, we will have decapitated ourselves; cut off our neck to spite our face. CAPP solves no problems and she did not want Alameda County to approve Pleasanton projects. Carole Varela, 3858 Mohr Avenue, believed that the comments made by Jocelyn Combs were scare tactics. She referred to the San Francisco property with regard to the CAPP Initiative, and said that development in the County is nearly impossible because of the difficulties in getting sewer and other services to this area. She then referred to another speaker who talked about parks and the possible 30 acre park at Staples Ranch. She reminded everyone that this property was right under the flight path of the Livermore Airport. The airport is expanding and the effects of noise and air traffic can only get worse. The CAPP Initiative is not stopping parks. The citizens do not have faith in the Council or there would not be so many referenda. She did not believe the public had to become Planning Commissions. It is not going to take away from the normal process the City goes through now. The developers will have to be more responsible to the community and the planning staff will have to make certain the plans are very good. The same process of Planning Commission and City Council review remains the same. The only difference is the citizens do not have to do a referendum for the City Council' s actions. She also did not have confidence that Council can draft a good Initiative for the ballot in March. She was at this meeting to support the property owners in the Vineyard Corridor and urged Council to support them. CAPP was not intended to hurt these property owners, it was aimed at large developments. Council had a choice when it approved the Specific Plan for Vineyard Corridor to eliminate these properties from the 8 09/20/99 Pleasanton City Council Minutes