CCMIN030414 - Laserfiche WebLink

like to see that explored versus a plan that identifies the level of housing needed to yield the funds to complete El Charro. Councilmember Pentin asked what the next steps would be for those developers asked to wait for completion of the Specific Plan, should the Council choose to halt the process today. Mr. Dolan explained that their options would be limited to waiting for the city to resume the planning process. They could alternatively choose to pursue a development independent of a Specific Plan, which would require a General Plan amendment. Councilmember Pentin said that to him it is a matter of seeing the process through and of the city doing as it said it would, and he questioned the logic in stopping the process today. He noted that he serves on the liaison committee with East Bay Regional Parks and that there is nothing in this plan that would preclude them from pursuing trail options around the Chain of Lakes. He said that the study of various housing options does not equal actual development and the elimination of RHNA as an immediate concern will actually allow for more thoughtful discussion of those options once the EIR is complete. He stated support for the first option presented by staff, noting that the evolution of any Specific Plan likely includes phasing as suggested in the second option. MOTION: It was moved by Pentin to direct staff to continue the Specific Planning process, with acknowledgement that the final product may include one or more phasing options. Councilmember Cook-Kallio noted that she is a resident of the east side herself. She said that while she was initially not in favor of the plan when it was first discussed, it was former Councilmember Sullivan who convinced her that it is this sort of smart planning that yields smart growth. Like Councilmember Brown, she has received many calls emails advocating for one side or other but it is the Council's responsibility to look at the long range view rather than advocating for one particular interest. She said it is wonderful that the discussion is no longer shadowed by the artificial construct that is RHNA. She also noted that failure to plan properly is exactly what landed the city in the situation where it was forced to aggressively rezone sites for by right development. She agreed with Ms. Dennis' points that current zoning does not appropriately address the need for low and very low income units and hoped the Council would be willing to have that conversation in the future. She stressed the importance of planning for beyond the 2022 time frame, which is realistically not as far off as some would like to think, and said she would like to be in a position where the city actually has reserves to reasonably and intelligently address future planning needs. She agreed that the community's wishes were clear when it voted in favor of the housing cap, but said it is equally clear that if the city had been flexible enough in that cap to accommodate for RHNA it would not have been forced as it was. She recognized that the Specific Plan process has not been easy but said the discussion is important. She cited the Kottinger Place and Pleasanton Gardens Task Force as an example of another lengthy and difficult process that ultimately yielded a great product for the community and suggested that additional community meetings could be of real benefit here as well. She also stressed the importance of the El Charro extension, which serves Pleasanton residents but also redirects traffic from Livermore and the Central Valley off of First Street, Valley Avenue and Santa Rita Road. She said she felt strongly that the extension would be necessary whether the east side is developed or not. The benefit of a Specific Plan is that the city is prepared from a planning perspective to capitalize on Measure B or other regional funds that might come available. She said she would like to see discussion continue, perhaps with an eye towards creating opportunities for truly affordable housing, and is not in favor of stopping the process at this point. She offered a second to the motion, with the idea that any phasing efforts include substantive conversations with all stakeholders throughout the city. Mayor Thorne requested clarification on the motion versus Option 2. City Council Minutes Page 11 of 12 March 4,2014