01 - Laserfiche WebLink

top and the distinct absence of either developers or the Chamber of Commerce. She urged the Council to remember the wishes of the citizens who voted for the Urban Growth Boundary in 1996. Alfred Exner said he finds the proposed plan completely unacceptable in terms of meeting the character of Pleasanton. Specifically, he objected to its failure to address athletic fields or public safety facilities for the east side, its destruction of existing wetlands, and the potential flooding issues that might result from the project. He said he felt the EIR was inherently flawed and asked the Council to support Option 3. Mayor Thorne asked how many in the audience believed any plan should include athletic fields, believed the proposed plan would destroy wetlands, or were concerned about fire and police protection. Kelly Cousins, speaking on behalf of those Task Force members who recently authored an editorial piece for The Pleasanton Weekly and The Independent. The article described the desire of the 5 authors to halt all ER and planning efforts, best reflected by Option 3. She said she felt the Task Force has done its job and what was developed is not supported by the community and therefore not a good plan for Pleasanton. She also expressed frustration that the Task Force was, in her opinion, driven largely by the infrastructure of El Charro and a potential school site as opposed to community desires. Darlene Miller explained that her educational and professional experience focuses on operations research and mathematical optimization models. She cautioned that the inputs in any model are critical to the output and that she had strong concerns with the forecasts, which are essentially guesses, used to identify the traffic, school and water impacts of the plan. She described the value in ensuring the validity of any model through the use of sensitivity analyses, as minor variations in input can result in significant variations in output. The latter would result in an elastic model which does not yield a realistic sense of the negative impacts. She said she would like to know whether the city's models were elastic to changes in the number of children per family and if so, she would strongly recommend conducting a sensitivity analysis to determine what the best, worse and expected case scenarios could be. Mayor Thorne asked how many in the audience felt the modeling was flawed. Sidney Cohen said that the public comments at the three community meetings were fairly uniform in their disapproval of and anger over the plan, the process and the current circumstances. He said he is opposed to urban sprawl and its deterioration of the quality of life that is so important to this community. He encouraged the Council to support Option 3. Mayor Thome asked how many in the audience were concerned over the impacts to their quality of life or felt anger over the current process. Lou Astburg disagreed with earlier comments that a decision to support Option 3 would be an emotional one. He stressed that in light of the complex situation that is the drought and with no solution in sight, the only choice is Option 3. Gary Mello recalled when the City Council initiated the planning process for Hacienda Business Park in 1982, which is just one instance of how sound planning has allowed Pleasanton to evolve with quality. He asked the Council to support Option 1, cautioning that without an adopted plan the community would essentially be left with the "no project" alternative and none of the anticipated infrastructure improvements. He expressed particular concern should El Charro be completed without any of the development anticipated by the plan. Vice Mayor Brown asked staff to comment on how development fees or other transportation dollars might be used to support infrastructure if the area were developed under its current zoning. City Council Minutes Page 9 of 15 May 19, 2015