My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
012015
>
01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/18/2015 2:01:20 PM
Creation date
1/14/2015 11:48:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
1/20/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
1
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Community Development Director Dolan introduced the item, which includes a review of the Draft <br /> EPSP and requested amendment to the Professional Services Agreement related to the revision of <br /> project alternatives studied within the EIR. He provided a brief history on the project, which began in <br /> 2011 when the City Council authorized the East Pleasanton Baseline Conditions Report. The EPSP <br /> Task Force began meetings in 2012 and in January of 2013 brought forward a vision statement to <br /> guide the development of the Plan. The Task Force ultimately prepared a Base Plan, formerly referred <br /> to as the Preferred Plan, and several alternatives for consideration in the EIR. The initial Base Plan <br /> included of 1,759 residential units, comprised of both single- and multi-family units. Six alternatives, <br /> ranging in size from 1,000 to 2,279 residential units, were also developed. As the Housing Element <br /> process aligned with the EPSP planning effort, it was discovered that the high-density residential <br /> zoning considered in the Plan area was not needed to city's Regional Housing Needs Assessment <br /> (RHNA). Therefore, after much discussion the Task Force ultimately made several revisions to both the <br /> Base Plan and EIR alternatives. <br /> As noted, the initial Base Plan consisted of 1,759 residential units, 1.6 million square feet of non- <br /> residential development and 759 acres space. The revised Base Plan eliminates all multi-family <br /> residential development and reduces the residential unit count to 1,300, with densities ranging from 5 to <br /> approximately 12 units per acre. No significant changes were made to the location and types of land <br /> uses. Notable changes to the alternatives include one new alternative with a park that acts only as a <br /> park, with the idea that it might be acquired and managed by East Bay Regional Parks District or <br /> another similar entity, one 800-unit alternative, and two 500-unit options. The latter options <br /> acknowledge the need to generate sufficient revenue to pay for the anticipated infrastructure, <br /> particularly the extension of El Charro Road, but examine how limiting the extent of El Charro <br /> improvements might help to support a lower number of overall units. One scenario looks at extending El <br /> Charro only as far as the freeway but not connecting to Stanley Boulevard whereas the other excludes <br /> any El Charro improvements. The Task Force also eliminated several alternatives including the 1,284- <br /> unit option, which sort of evolved into the revised Base Plan, and the largest 2,279 unit alternative. Staff <br /> is requesting that the Council authorize the addition and environmental study of these new alternatives <br /> to the EIR. <br /> Councilmember Brown asked and Mr. Dolan confirmed that number of residential units needed was <br /> extrapolated from the anticipated infrastructure costs, ergo eliminating the cost of the El Charro <br /> extension would mean that fewer homes are needed to cover the overall cost. She asked whether, <br /> given the concern that El Charro would become a regional road if extended, regional funds would be <br /> available to cover the cost. <br /> Mr. Dolan agreed there would likely be some regional usage of the improvement, that the project is <br /> listed as a possibility in the transportation measure, but that there is no specific funding line item. Based <br /> on that, staff and the Task Force have operated as though no regional funds are available. <br /> Mayor Thome asked Mr. Dolan to clarify for the public what defines the Base Plan. <br /> Mr. Dolan explained that the Base Plan is a working draft plan that serves as the primary subject of the <br /> EIR. As is required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the EIR must also look at a <br /> range of alternatives. Understanding that the dialogue is going to continue and that issues will continue <br /> to evolve, the Base Plan and range of alternatives provide the analysis and flexibility to ultimately adopt <br /> a scenario that falls within the range described and best serves the community. <br /> Mayor Thorne asked and Mr. Dolan confirmed that the Council could ultimately adopt features from one <br /> or more plans, provided the range has been evaluated by the EIR and that the EIR serves to largely to <br /> ensure that the scope of whatever is selected at the end of the day has been properly evaluated. He <br /> commented that the terms Preferred Plan and Base Plan tend to create confusion, leading many to <br /> believe that plan is the intended plan from the outset. <br /> City Council Minutes Page 4 of 18 Dec 16, 2014 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.