SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL - Laserfiche WebLink

Subject: FW: Centerpointe Property - Application for Re- Zoning Attachments: Letter to City Council re Centerpoint rezoning.docx; ATT00001.htm From: Tracy Dunne Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 11:02 AM To: Pleasanton City Clerk Subject: FW: Centerpointe Property - Application for Re- Zoning SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL Provided to the City Council After Distribution of Packet Date . err 0 From: George Bowen Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 2:50 PM To: Mayor and City Council < citycouncil @cityofpleasantonca.gov> Subject: Centerpointe Property - Application for Re- Zoning Subject: P15- 0248 /PUD- 111/P15- 0249/P15- 0390/P15 -0250 Ponderosa II Application to Rezone Centerpointe Church Property Dear Mayor Thorne, Vice Mayor Brown and Council Members, I believe this matter is scheduled to come before you on Tuesday, October 6. I am writing to encourage the Council to approve this application for rezoning. While recently 1 have more often communicated with you advocating a limitation on new residential zoning approval, I would like to briefly state why I support this rezoning application. Negligible Impact on Water and Traffic - Staff's Report to the Planning Commission reflected minimal, if any, negative impact in the key areas of water and traffic. Even if the Staffs estimate turned out to be understated, any adverse impact in these areas would be negligible for the following reasons: • The proposed number of homes represents Less that 1 /1,000th of our existing residential inventory. Water and vehicular usage are made up of residential and non - residential users. With a conservative estimate of non - residential contributing 20% of the total impact and traffic and water, the proposed plan would represent less than 8096 of 1 /1,000th of total traffic and water demand. • And, since the proposed plan replaces an existing contributor of water and traffic demand, any incremental change to water and traffic would in reality amount to a small fraction of a fraction of the previously mentioned 0.008% of total water and traffic. For example, a 10% increase from the project over current use would still only be an increase of less than 8/100,000th of current usage. Minimal Impact on Schools - Virtually any increase on school enrollment in over- crowded schools is detrimental, even if developer mitigation fees are paid. With the approval of the application, an additional approximately 35 -40 school children (my estimate) will join our schools. However, elementary and middle school students are in the Alisal ES and Harvest Park MS attendance areas, which are the least populated elementary and middle schools in the city. The Greater Good for our Community - If adding any new residential zoning were viewed as a negative for the community, deciding the "greater good" for the community must also consider the potential loss of a long -term place of worship to Pleasanton. For disclosure - while not members, my wife and I have attended Centerpointe for the past few years and I have had the opportunity to see first -hand the good that this community of faith provides our city. I do not know what Centerpointe's options are if they are unable to complete their prospective sale to Ponderosa, but I can envision the church struggling to find another suitable location in Pleasanton if the application is not approved. Next year, Centerpointe will celebrate its 140th year of meeting the spiritual and other needs of Pleasanton residents. In a city 1