CCMIN112283 - Laserfiche WebLink

273 Mr. Curt Altschul asked that if the referendum is successful will the Council andldeveloper rescind the development agreement. Mr. Dennis Salmon, attorney representing Prudential Insurance Company, stated that the comments of the opponents spring from a misunderstanding of the development agreement; the agreement is created by state legislature and many cities use this procedure - there are three other such agreements in Pleasanton. He stated this provides a framework for future City Councils as well as this City Council to mea- sure performance standards. This development agreement encourages the developer to go ahead with capital improvements and at the same time leaves the checks and bal- ances in the PUD plan. He added that he felt this particular development agreement is more restrictive than the statutes require, and also allows future Councils options and flexibility. He stated that the developer has already committed $32 million for off-site improvements, and without this agreement there is no certainty for financ- ing as set forth - the concept is for long range planning. He stated this develop- ment plan does not violate the court injunction, and added that any City decision is open to law suits. Mr. Mike Hogan, Earth Mettles, representing Prudential insurance Company, stated that all of the concerns expressed by the opponents have been addressed in the En- vironmental impact Report in detail regarding regional impacts, air quality, soils, traffic, and noise. He stated that in response to Ms. Myers, the soundwall in the Parkside development was constructed to specific plan and that the developer changed his plans after construction of the soundwall. There being no further testimony, Mayor Butler declared the public hearing closed. Councilmember Mercer suggested the term of the agreement period be reduced to the year 1996; by that time the business park will be 57-63% approved and constructed and if any environmental impacts should be prevalent then the new City Council could enter into a new agreement. He stated the many conditions of the PUD plan, the miti- gation agreement, CC&R's, the North Pleasanton Assessment District, and now the development agreement, will allow adequate control of the development. He stated this would also coincide with the 1996 population and general plan figures. Councilmember Mohr concurred. Mr. Joe Callahan stated he did not think the development agreement would bind the Council in any fashion and it provides Hacienda Business Park with reasonable protection. He stated that both Prudential Insurance Company and Callahan-Pentz Properties will accept the change in the time period of the agreement. Mayor Butler stated the concept of the development agreement is important; the basic purpose is to guarantee that the development will be built the way Council has looked at it and approved it. He added this agreement validates what Council has already decided upon and provides the framework to insure that it will be implemented. After discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Mercer, and seconded by Council- member Brandes, that Ordinance No. 1113 , after finding the Hacienda Business Park project is consistent with the General Plan, approving the application of the Pruden- tial Insurance Company of America and Callahan-Pentz Properties for a Development Agreement for a 573 acre "business park" to include approximately 23 net acres of "garden" offices, 62 net acres of general offices, 50 net acres of "mid-risB" offices, 47 net acres of industrial/warehousing, 273 net acres of research and development/ light manufacturing, and 38 acres of retail commercial/financial development with the remaining approximately 80 acres to be used for street and flood channel right-of-way, to be located on the east side of Hopyard Road between the Arroyo Mocho and a point 12. 11/22/83