SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL - Laserfiche WebLink

E.6q tik._ the Cif,, Council From: Joanne Hall F. � �:� ., -_s Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 3:07 PM ,-joibution of packet To: Brock Roby; Mayor and City Council Cc: Brian Dolan; Janice Stern; Maria Hoey; Pleasanton City Clerk Subject: RE: City Council - Item 9 comments Jatc Dear Mr. Roby: Thank you for taking the time to write and share your concerns about the East Side Specific Plan. This email acknowledges receipt of your email to the City Council and the City Manager. Thank you again for your interest in the City of Pleasanton. Joanne Hall Public Information Officer From: Brock Roby Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 2:59 PM To: Mayor and City Council Subject: City Council - Item 9 comments Mayor&City Council Members, I will not likely be able to attend the CC meeting this evening, but wanted to send you my thoughts and comments regarding Item 9 on the East Pleasanton Specific Plan process. I am on the EPSP Task Force, but I am not representing the TF in my comments here. I work as a civil engineer, but I am not working for any of the land owners or developers involved in the plan area. I recommend that you continue the specific plan process and see it through to completion now. I think adding a phasing plan is a good idea as long as the phasing plan does not have arbitrary time limits—rather it defines an order to which development will progress to insure necessary infrastructure completion and perhaps flexibility of late-stage zoning to meet housing needs that may become apparent later in the development process. The reasons I would suggest for not halting the planning process now are as follows: 1. Even if the SP is completed by the end of this year, it will likely be 6—8 years, at the earliest, before the plan area could be built-out, even assuming the least dense option. This is due to the GMO,which is in place and governs when we are not behind on entitlements to meet our RHNA numbers. In reality, it will likely take longer than 6-8 years due to the required infrastructure improvements and the necessary steps for financing these— either by approving higher density(adds years to the build-out per GMO)or by finding outside funding sources. 2. To stop the planning process now implies that the EP plan area is useful only as a RHNA dumping ground. To stop now that RHNA is not an issue suggests that planning would only start again when RHNA becomes an issue —not something that the community wants for the EP plan area. 3. We still have a work-force housing shortage, despite being current on our RHNA allocation. The recently entitled HDR projects are entirely 100%rental properties. The inventory for single-family homes in Pleasanton is below demand, which serves to drive prices higher. Halting planning for the EP plan area will encourage the gentrification of Pleasanton. 1