11 ATTACHMENTS 08-11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Dear Ms. Stern, Honorable City Planning Committee Members and City Council Members: We are residents of Ironwood Community of Pleasanton and we are writing to express our concerns regarding the selected "Preferred Plan" for the East Pleasanton Specific Plan that has resulted from the work of the EPSP Task Force. Like you, we moved to Pleasanton because of well-planned community and good schools. The current City composition is about 75% single family housing and owner occupied. We would like to see future development in Pleasanton continue in this way. We are concerned that East Pleasanton is being asked to take more than its "fair share" of the mandated RHNA numbers and multi-family housing. We understand that the reason often given for this is that it's an open space and it will be easier to get approvals without neighbors nearby. We are speaking up as the neighbors nearby. We will be significantly impacted by any development in the EPSP area. Our roads and schools will also be significantly impacted. Here are a few key concerns from residents of our community for your consideration: (1) While we appreciate the efforts of the Task Force, Planning Commission and City Council to do its best to preserve at least a 65/35% ratio single family to multi-family housing, we are still extremely concerned with the total units of 1759 reflected in the Preferred Plan. "The Preferred Plan (Alternative 5C)would accommodate approximately 62 percent of the total estimated housing need, and about 51 percent of the multifamily housing need over that period (2014-2030)" Why should East Pleasanton be over-burdened to meet the multi-family housing need for all of Pleasanton? This clearly does not reflect a balanced distribution across Pleasanton that City Council members said they supported. We are also concerned this doesn't consider the impact the recently approved Auf De Mar plan will add. Together the projects would add more than 2000 total units and close to 700 high density units to a concentrated East Pleasanton Area. Traffic is already at near unacceptable levels. This will most certainly seriously impact our roads. We request that you consider a more balanced distribution of RHNA numbers and high density housing across the city, instead of asking East Pleasanton to absorb 50% of the high density housing. (2)In the previous financial feasibility studies, former option 5 (1430 total units with 715/715 SF/MF units) was deemed marginally feasible, and option 7 (1759 total units with 878/881 SF/MF units) was considered feasible. Among all different type of units, SF with 8-11 d/a are most profitable. Based on this analysis, one does not need as high total units to be feasible when the percentage of SF to MF is higher(like 65% vs. 50% SF). We would like the Planning Commission and City Council to reduce the total units to a number closer to 1430 as originally conceived (with 65% SF=930 and 35% MF=500 units), which will provide more single family units than both former option 5 and 7, and still make a project financially feasible.