SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL - Laserfiche WebLink

Subject: FW: Workday � ,M, PPLEMENTAL MATERIAL Couni --original Message---- Prod to th City cl From: Becky Dennis After vide Distribution e of Packet Sent:Sunday, May 18,o ncil 8:30 PM To: Mayor and City Council Date Cc:Pat Belding; Dolores Bengtson;jocelyn combs Subject:Workday Dear Mayor Thorne and City Council members. Unfortunately I will be out of the country and unable to attend your Tuesday meeting. However, I have had a chance to review the Staff Report,and would like to offer the following comments, as well as a suggestion we sincerely hope you will consider. First, I appreciate Brian Griggs securing additional analysis from Illingworth &Rodkin of greenhouse gas(GHG) emissions for the Workday project. I am unsure how to evaluate the use of the 16.6 mile commute information gathered from the Hacienda employee commute survey,without knowing the date of the survey,the method and/or purpose of collecting information. It would seem more reliable to use the latest Census data which shows the growing in-commute from outside the Tri-Valley as more than 75%.The actual average commute could be closer to 19 miles. (See notes below). Whether a longer commute length raises the GHG impacts above the level of significance for this project is far less a concern than the increasing size and length of the in-commute. Without a commitment to ensuring development of adequate workforce housing Pleasanton will continue to increase its contribution to GHG emissions. Citizens for a Caring.Community urges the Council to,at the very least,address this impact by identifying and zoning a site with sufficient acreage to mitigate the loss of the Windstar Communities development plan. Displacing plans for affordable residential development at the West Dublin BART station is certainly less than ideal. Reviewing the Fiscal Analysis failed to reveal any big financial win that justifies losing a site with such uniquely high potential for mitigating Pleasanton's growing GHG emissions. With General Fund revenues of$92,414,679,giving up such an environmentally important housing site for a paltry$172,200 annually seems unnecessary and irresponsible. Pleasanton likely would not miss this"all new" revenue if the BART site remained vacant. Given the source and small amount of the annual increase,we suggest that the Council dedicate this revenue to the development of nonprrofit workforce housing.These new funds could provide a significant resource for workforce housing partnerships without burdening new or existing businesses.We believe that the right nonprofit housing products and related community infrastructure investments would also support and improve the attractiveness of commercially zoned property throughout the City. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Becky Dennis Citizens for Caring Community Notes: 1