Jim Hutchins, Livermore

 John Marchand’s letter titled “SLD Never Had a Real Plan” perpetuates his attacks on those seeking to preserve downtown Livermore. True to form, he misstates their positions, and introduces senseless arguments.

 Marchand states SLD’s ad claims 230 apartments “will create less of an impact” than 130, but in truth, the ad only refers to Eden’s inadequate parking. SLD brought up the positive aspects of robotic parking, which is cheaper, and would offer drivers ample parking spaces.

 Marchand complains the ad uses “qualifying words”, such as, “may”, “could”, and “potential” which is sensible for a group submitting a proposal that “may” be considered, “could” be successful, and might “potentially” be adopted” by the city. Marchand then boldly demands SLD put up a bond to indemnify Eden and the City. Citizens offering proposals to the city are not required to draw them, prove their viability, or pay for them. It’s the City’s responsibility to create feasible plans that make sense, not the other way around. Unfortunately, the city has failed in their duty under Marchand’s leadership (as well as Mayor Woerner’s), to achieve these goals.

 Marchand continues by attacking the concept of a robotic garage based on his flawed assumptions which lack scientific data to support them. Marchand uses simplistic math to inaccurately calculate retrieval times in robotic parking using a system of single entry/exit. However, automated garages of this size include multiple entry/exits. He confused expected retrieval times with vehicle delivery rates. However, the system works in parallel, retrieving additional cars and queuing them during delivery, so each exit can deliver cars much faster than “one every three minutes”. The Eden Housing garage is for private residential use only, not a public garage, and as such, Marchand’s quote of 22 hours to retrieve a car is preposterous.

 Marchand mischaracterizes the ad that says, “Move the Housing – Leave the contamination behind”, by insinuating SLD intends to ignore the problem of contamination. Their ad never proposed the contamination be ignored. SLD suggests moving the housing off the toxic site since, due to the City’s negligence, the discovery of contamination has been determined to be much worse than previously reported.

 Finally, Marchand states “SLD has shown us only a drawing.” He ignores all the financial analysis and studies included on their website, as well as in the very ad he is citing. The truth is it’s Marchand’s plan that’s fallen flat with the citizens.