My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
061615
>
01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/18/2015 11:50:46 AM
Creation date
6/9/2015 3:53:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
6/16/2015
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.
/
15
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
issues raised in Ms. Cousins' editorial piece would be issues regardless of whether or not the plan <br /> moves forward. <br /> Maurice Turner said he selected Pleasanton for the high quality of life enjoyed by its residents and <br /> asked the Council to support Option 3. <br /> Diane Rodriguez said the town has changed dramatically since she moved here in 1958, at which point <br /> the water table was reported to be about 10 feet below the ground surface. She estimated that to be <br /> closer to 150 feet today. She reminded the Council and public that from 1880-1920 Pleasanton served <br /> as the water source for the city and county of San Francisco and now its own residents cannot even <br /> reap the same benefits. She said the impact of growth on water, in addition to the other negative <br /> environmental impacts, are not warranted by the development contemplated by the specific plan. She <br /> asked the Council to acknowledge what has really been a planning mistake and to support Option 3. <br /> Wing Tse said that at the second community meeting he had asked what the additional load on the <br /> waste water treatment plant at Stoneridge and 1-580 would be under the proposed plan. When he then <br /> asked if the plant could handle the additional 570,000 gallons per day, no answer was given. Today he <br /> asked the Council whether the addition of 1,300 homes and the resulting strain on infrastructure would <br /> increase what he and others current pay for waste water treatment. <br /> Mayor Thome said it has already been reported that there is sufficient sewer capacity and requested <br /> that staff meet with Mr. Tse to address any other questions. <br /> Lisa Vorderbroeggen, Building Industry Association of the Bay Area, said that it is unrealistic to think <br /> that this or any other Bay Area community can simply raise its drawbridges and refuse to plan for <br /> growth despite the drought. She reported that the Bay Area is projected to add 1.1 million jobs and <br /> 660,000 households by 2040. While the region has exceeded jobs projections by almost 200% to date, <br /> it has fallen 30% behind in housing. The affordable housing crisis continues to force current and future <br /> generations out of their hometowns and condemns them to long commutes. She saw no evidence that <br /> completing this planning process would produce any insurmountable negative consequences but said <br /> that failure to plan would almost certainly hurt future generations. The Building Industry Association of <br /> the Bay Area urges the Council to stay the planning course and avail itself of the considerable land use <br /> controls embedded in the specific plan process. <br /> Rong Wu said he has noticed significant changes in traffic since moving here in 2008 and questioned <br /> the EIR's claims that extension of El Charro Road would mitigate congestion along Sunol Boulevard, <br /> First Street or Bernal Avenue. <br /> Christine Gibney said that despite her initial skepticism and support for Option 1, she could support the <br /> ballot option proposed by the Mayor. <br /> George Bowen agreed that perhaps a public vote would be most effective in determining which side the <br /> majority truly falls on. He expressed concern that a ballot measure might be weighted in favor of the <br /> side backed by the pockets of developers but also said this community has a solid history of allowing <br /> the city to guide its progress in this manner. He said that "sprawl" is a real thing that was used as part <br /> of Measure FF to establish the Urban Growth Boundary 19 years ago and is not at all politically <br /> charged. <br /> Steve Dunn, Legacy/Lionstone, said that as both a landowner representative and Bay Area native he is <br /> very invested in doing the right thing for this community. Since Legacy's acquisition of its property in <br /> 2007 they have been involved in the planning efforts that only became formalized several years ago. <br /> He stressed that the current issue at hand is about a planning process and its attempts to respond to <br /> any issues and concerns that arise through that process. He said the Task Force discussion and <br /> feedback has been very positive to date and he had no cause to believe that had changed. He asked <br /> City Council Minutes Page 11 of 15 May 19,2015 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.