CCMIN081710 - Laserfiche WebLink

Councilmember Sullivan said he has been involved in Pleasanton civic and planning affairs for a long time. Things like the housing cap and urban growth boundary has always been very important to him and to the community, not only because it was a growth control mechanism which people believed in, but it was also approved by the voters. Because of this, his first reaction when the judgment came against the City was to appeal it. When Mr. Brown summarized what the judge told the City to do, it made him that much more angry and adamant that a court could essentially strip away local control and decision - making authority of its land use, which is something he strongly believes in. As the City understood the issues more thoroughly and those limitations the City had in appealing it, he came to believe that appealing it would be very difficult, expensive and not likely successful. The Council took a lot of time strategizing ways to appeal it and identified what those chances would be. On the other hand, complying with the judgment was also not acceptable to him because of the local control issues and the fact that the City would have little discretion over what could be built at Hacienda. He has been supportive of a true, transit, walkable and livable community in Hacienda and without the Council's ability to influence the outcome of that project, the City could have ended up with something that did not provide this and would not give the community what it needed from both affordable housing and a place where people wanted to live. Councilmember Sullivan said there were three criteria associated with the rezonings and the developments at BART; one was that the City still has some discretion for the community through the Hacienda Task Force which was able to be kept in the agreement and for the Council to be able to weigh in what the project would look like and what it would provide. They were able to ensure they had environmental analysis in complying with CEQA, which was questionable with the ruling, so the City could look at air quality, noise and traffic. The City was able to maintain that at the end of the day, if the community did not like what was proposed, they could referend it. So, these things were able to be kept in the agreement and were things that allowed him to agree with settlement negotiations. He said the other extremely important concern to him was losing the housing cap and embarking on a housing element update that would require the City to do rezonings throughout the community to accommodate RHNA numbers for higher density housing without some kind of effective and meaningful growth management policies in place in parallel. The economy is such that the floodgates will not be open today, but some day they may be, and the Council is looking at housing not seen in the City in the past. To evaluate and put in place alternative growth management strategies in parallel with the Housing Element is also very important and is a major accomplishment as part of the negotiations. The kinds of things he believes need to be included are growth based on environmental and economic sustainability. The City needs to evaluate its infrastructure and the idea of tying it in with the Climate Action Plan is a good idea. He is also supportive of a subcommittee that monitors implementation of the agreement, as well as coming up with growth management strategies. He would like community involvement as well, and suggested upfront work that the subcommittee, staff, and consultants should accomplish in workshops. To him, the Climate Action Plan has been on the Council's priority list for a long time and now the City must do it. In conclusion, he is not happy with the entire outcome and he feels it is an example of the State and others, especially given the Attorney General weighing in, continuing to pre -empt local decision - making authority. But, based upon the circumstances the City found itself in, it is much better off with this than if the ruling was implemented as the judge put forth. He thanked the subcommittee of Councilmember McGovern and Mayor Hosterman for their work into the City Council Minutes Page 5 of 11 August 17, 2010