SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL - Laserfiche WebLink

Holland& Knight 50 California Street,Suite 2800!San Francisco,CA 94111 I T 415.743.6900 F 415.743.6910 Holland&Knight LLP J mvw.hklaw.com David L.Preiss (415)743-6914 david.preissgihklaw.com May 19, 2015 VIA EMAIL Honorable Mayor and City Council Members City of Pleasanton do City Clerk 200 Old Bernal Avenue Pleasanton,CA 94566 Re: City Council Agenda Item 14,May 19,2015 Consider Adopting a Resolution Terminating, Pausing,or Continuing the Planning Process for the East Pleasanton Specific Plan and Related Environmental Review Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members: We represent Kiewit Infrastructure Co. ("Kiewit") in connection with the above matter. As you know, Kiewit is the owner of approximately 50 acres of land on the southwestern border of the East Pleasanton Specific Plan("EPSP"). As set forth in Kiewit's correspondence dated May 13,2015,we urge you to continue moving forward with the EPSP planning and related EIR process by adopting Option 1 ("Continue the EPSP Planning Process and EIR Preparation")as set forth as in your Staff Report for tonight's hearing. We also want to express our legal concerns regarding potential actions that you may consider this evening to either suspend ("pause") for an indefinite period of time or terminate such processing. As you are aware, Kiewit's property and the other properties situated within the EPSP area have been designated "East Pleasanton Specific Plan" since your adoption of the 2005 -2025 Pleasanton General Plan many years ago. Your Staff Report proposes four options,three of which would either indefinitely suspend (Options 2a and 2b) or terminate (Option 3) the contemplated and pending EPSP planning and EIR processes. Shutting down the EPSP process in this manner would be in contravention of the General Plan, which by its express provisions calls for the adoption of a Specific Plan for this very area. Your adoption of any option to suspend or terminate the EPSP process in this manner would be tantamount to the adoption of an amendment to the Pleasanton General Plan deleting the "East Pleasanton Specific Plan" designation and related policies and programs for this area (including but not limited to Program 6.1 cited in your Staff Report). Any such amendment to the General Plan cannot be adopted by you in the manner proposed in the Staff Report, but rather Anchorage I Atlanta I Austin I Boston I Chicago I Dallas I Denver I Fort Lauderdale I Jacksonville I Lakeland I Los Angeles I Miami New York I Northern Virginia I Orlando I Portland I San Francisco I Tallahassee J Tampa I Washington,D.C.I West Palm Beach #35602900_v3