CCMIN121614 - Laserfiche WebLink

Community Development Director Dolan introduced the item, which includes a review of the Draft EPSP and requested amendment to the Professional Services Agreement related to the revision of project alternatives studied within the EIR. He provided a brief history on the project, which began in 2011 when the City Council authorized the East Pleasanton Baseline Conditions Report. The EPSP Task Force began meetings in 2012 and in January of 2013 brought forward a vision statement to guide the development of the Plan. The Task Force ultimately prepared a Base Plan, formerly referred to as the Preferred Plan, and several alternatives for consideration in the EIR. The initial Base Plan included of 1,759 residential units, comprised of both single- and multi-family units. Six alternatives, ranging in size from 1,000 to 2,279 residential units, were also developed. As the Housing Element process aligned with the EPSP planning effort, it was discovered that the high-density residential zoning considered in the Plan area was not needed to city's Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). Therefore, after much discussion the Task Force ultimately made several revisions to both the Base Plan and EIR alternatives. As noted, the initial Base Plan consisted of 1,759 residential units, 1.6 million square feet of non- residential development and 759 acres space. The revised Base Plan eliminates all multi-family residential development and reduces the residential unit count to 1,300, with densities ranging from 5 to approximately 12 units per acre. No significant changes were made to the location and types of land uses. Notable changes to the alternatives include one new alternative with a park that acts only as a park, with the idea that it might be acquired and managed by East Bay Regional Parks District or another similar entity, one 800-unit alternative, and two 500-unit options. The latter options acknowledge the need to generate sufficient revenue to pay for the anticipated infrastructure, particularly the extension of El Charro Road, but examine how limiting the extent of El Charro improvements might help to support a lower number of overall units. One scenario looks at extending El Charro only as far as the freeway but not connecting to Stanley Boulevard whereas the other excludes any El Charro improvements. The Task Force also eliminated several alternatives including the 1,284- unit option, which sort of evolved into the revised Base Plan, and the largest 2,279 unit alternative. Staff is requesting that the Council authorize the addition and environmental study of these new alternatives to the EIR. Councilmember Brown asked and Mr. Dolan confirmed that number of residential units needed was extrapolated from the anticipated infrastructure costs, ergo eliminating the cost of the El Charro extension would mean that fewer homes are needed to cover the overall cost. She asked whether, given the concern that El Charro would become a regional road if extended, regional funds would be available to cover the cost. Mr. Dolan agreed there would likely be some regional usage of the improvement, that the project is listed as a possibility in the transportation measure, but that there is no specific funding line item. Based on that, staff and the Task Force have operated as though no regional funds are available. Mayor Thorne asked Mr. Dolan to clarify for the public what defines the Base Plan. Mr. Dolan explained that the Base Plan is a working draft plan that serves as the primary subject of the EIR. As is required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the EIR must also look at a range of alternatives. Understanding that the dialogue is going to continue and that issues will continue to evolve, the Base Plan and range of alternatives provide the analysis and flexibility to ultimately adopt a scenario that falls within the range described and best serves the community. Mayor Thorne asked and Mr. Dolan confirmed that the Council could ultimately adopt features from one or more plans, provided the range has been evaluated by the EIR and that the EIR serves to largely to ensure that the scope of whatever is selected at the end of the day has been properly evaluated. He commented that the terms Preferred Plan and Base Plan tend to create confusion, leading many to believe that plan is the intended plan from the outset. City Council Minutes Page 4 of 18 Dec 16, 2014