CCMIN061813 - Laserfiche WebLink

Colleen Winey, Zone 7 Water Agency and task force member, read a letter submitted by Zone 7's General Manager to the Planning Commission. In summary, the letter expressed Zone 7's interest in the EPSP area because of the involvement of Lakes H, I and Cope and noted that any plan for the Chain of Lakes must be consistent with all existing Zone 7 master plans and agreements. As part of Zone 7's continuing mission to provide reliable high quality water supply and effective regional flood protection, its staff has created a methodology to systematically evaluate and plan for various opportunities and applications for each lake and the area as a whole. To better coordinate with the City's current planning effort, Zone 7 has accelerated the evaluation of Lakes H, I and Cope and will present a preliminary evaluation and status report to the Zone 7 Board of Directors on June 19, 2013. Becky Dennis offered to answer any questions regarding the letter she submitted to the Council. She asked the Council to include affordability in its consideration. She said she has reached the conclusion the best option for meeting affordable workforce housing demands is in areas with existing infrastructure rather than sites such as this. She cautioned that the retail and industrial components of each alternative only increase, rather than address, workforce housing needs and suggested that property owners be asked to consider what a self-mitigating development might look like. She said she did not believe that any of the alternatives provided are workable in terms of making a real contribution to the overall needs of the city. Julie Testa said she felt strongly that new development should pay for itself. She read from the City's General Plan, noting that every Pleasanton school exceeds the enrollment targets stated within the General Plan as well as the maximum enrollment recommendations published by the California Department of Education. The cited a 2011 report by Pleasanton Unified School District which identifies that the district lacks sufficient capacity to house students created by future development. The district also has $27 million in facilities' debt that it cannot repay. With the knowledge that there is no space in Pleasanton schools nor a plan or the ability to build new schools to mitigate new growth, the City Council violates the General Plan with every unit it approves. She asked the Council to consider a new alternative in which the EPSP area would be developed with all senior housing, thereby avoiding any impacts to schools. Mary Switzer asked staff to define low and very low income relative to Pleasanton. She said she would hate to see East Pleasanton become a dumping ground for high density development and asked whether any other areas of Pleasanton, such as Hacienda or Stoneridge, were considered as alternative locations to meet the needs of the next two RHNA cycles. She cited strong concerns about traffic, confirmed that the idea is for development to pay for needed infrastructure in a way that makes it cost neutral to the City, and noted that while more houses make the infrastructure more affordable they also increase the impacts. Mayor Thorne asked staff to follow up with Ms. Switzer regarding her questions. Carol Cohen stated that the proposed alternatives adversely impact traffic, schools, fire, police, and utilities and burden east Pleasanton with an excessively high percentage of RHNA units. She asked that the task force develop additional proposals that reduce the total number of units, percentage of RHNA units and distribute the impacts of this new development across all areas of Pleasanton. Sandi Farrell, Ironwood Homeowners' Association President, encouraged the Council to revisit its previous commitment to spread low-income high-density housing throughout the city rather than to allocate the majority of RHNA in one area. She strongly urged consideration of Alternative 1 as the most reasonable and fair plan for current residents of the east side. Heather Liang, Ironwood resident, said she originally supported Alternative 1 due to it proposing the lowest percentage of RHNA units and lowest number of total units. She said she felt that those who shared her position were brushed aside at the recent Planning Commission meeting, with consideration City Council Minutes Page 8 of 13 June 18, 2013