CCMIN101513 - Laserfiche WebLink

Councilmember Brown assured the public that she read every letter and email she received. She acknowledged the frustration of attending these meetings and feeling that you have not been listened to by elected officials. She stated support for Alternative 1, specifically an Alternative 1A that allows the OSC to remain at its present location. She said she could support modification of the proposed school location if the Vice-Mayor felt strongly in that regard. She asked that the Council listen to citizens when they say they would like a more conservative plan. She said she felt the plan should satisfy RHNA only for the next planning period and address the 2022-2030 period later if needed. She expressed strong concerns over traffic, noting that Traffic Engineer Tassano indicated the preferred plan would net an additional 31,000 daily car trips. The EIR process should contemplate funding for the extension of El Charro, which is estimated to cost between $61 and $63 million. She noted that she and other members of the Council shared an appreciation for Pleasanton's small town feel in their campaign statements and hoped they would stand true to those principles in contemplating development of the east side. Vice-Mayor Cook-Kallio said the community has identified both workforce housing and schools as priorities and in order to fund schools and their related infrastructure, more intense development is needed. Ultimately, this or a subsequent Council will have to balance those needs against one another. She said she would like a better understanding of exactly how many units are needed to fully fund the plan areas infrastructure. She said she would like to look at alternative funding options for both schools and the El Charro extension, noting the latter provides benefits that reach well beyond Pleasanton boundaries. She acknowledged that job creation does not directly correlate to RHNA but also expressed concern over the nexus between jobs created by commercial, industrial and retail development and the subsequent housing need. She said that in order to truly be a city of planned progress, it is critical to look beyond just the next RHNA cycle. She said she was sensitive to the concerns of the surrounding neighborhoods and acknowledged how abstract this information, without the right education, must seem. She noted that her own experience on the Council gives her a different perspective and this process is about more than RHNA, it is also about planning the future of the last undeveloped portion of Pleasanton. She said she is devastated that little has been done to accommodate workforce housing and agreed that working with non-profit developers is a critical step in addressing the high cost of living in this area. She explained that her focus tonight is more on ensuring that every eventuality is described in these alternatives than on whether or not she supports a particular feature. She asked whether there is any benefit in zoning some of the proposed commercial sites as multi-use in case it should later be determined that residential is more appropriate. Mr. Dolan said he would look into it. Vice-Mayor Cook-Kallio said she strongly believed that if the El Charro extension is not constructed early on it would turn into another Stoneridge Drive. She did, however, express support for starting with a two lane extension that could be phased to four lanes if ultimately needed. She recommended that staff look into the potential for funding from other local communities and regional agencies that would also benefit from the extension. Councilmember Narum thanked the public for their feedback and said she shared a number of the concerns expressed, including those related to traffic, schools and infrastructure. She strongly agreed that the distribution of workforce housing and RHNA obligation is spread proportionately throughout the city. She said it is important to recognize that the EIR includes a base or benchmark plan, which is then bookended by a minimum and maximum level of development and a number of things in between. She said she views the EIR as a guide for final build out of the city and the Council and public will then have to identify policies that determine how and when this occurs. She said she could support Alternative 1A but would like to eliminate Alternative 5A, which seems unnecessary given the preferred plan and Alternative 5B. MOTION: It was m/s by Narum/Brown to approve the staff recommendation, with the addition of an Alternative 1A as described and elimination of Alternative 5A. City Council Minutes Page 10 of 13 October 15,2013