PC 051309 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Olson agreed with Commissioner Narum and noted that Ms. Dennis brought up an important matter in the housing cap and the issue that the State has with that. He stated that he believes the idea should be incorporated in the recommendation to the Council that the City reach out to the community and look for ideas as to how to address the issue. Commissioner Pentin referred to changes made to Chapter 2, Land Use Element, following the letter from the Attorney General’s Office, specifically Programs 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, 2.7, and 2.8 and on pages 2-28, 2-29; and Program 9.1 on page 2-30. He noted that it has been stated they have been made more binding and inquired if there had been any consultation with the Attorney General’s Office with respect to if these changes were satisfactory, or if this is what the City anticipates will satisfy the Attorney General’s Office. Ms. Stern replied that staff made a good faith effort to address the issues by incorporating the suggestions made by the Attorney General’s Office; however, the letter from the Attorney General’s Office, dated May 8, 2009, indicates that it was not satisfied with the changes. Commissioner Pentin referred to Program 6.1 on page 2-30 regarding preparing a Specific Plan for East Pleasanton. He inquired if a timeframe should be included as the General Plan goes to 2025. Commissioner Blank stated that this was a good question. He noted that general plans are ten-year plans, even though the planning view for this General Plan is 2025. Ms. Stern stated that the City Council determines its priorities. Mr. Dolan stated that there is no law indicating that a General Plan must be updated on a certain date, other than the Housing Element. He noted that ten years is a good rule of thumb as approaching ten years, conditions have changed enough and the environmental analysis is no longer fresh that it would be time to start thinking about an update. He indicated that the City would typically start getting letters regarding how outdated the General Plan is, which would make it subject to challenge. Commissioner Pentin referred to Chapter 3, Circulation Element, Program 10.3 on page 3-51 regarding developing the Downtown section of the Transportation Corridor with parking, a pedestrian and bicycle trail, and landscaping. He then referred to Program 22.10 on page 3-55, which repeats the statement with the addition that it be consistent with the 2002 Master Plan for the Downtown Parks and Trails System and the Downtown Specific Plan. He stated that the two Programs should be consistent with each other. Commissioner Pentin then referred to Policy 19 on page 3-54 regarding the Altamont Commuter Express and noted that he did not see anything about an ACE Train Station in Pleasanton. He inquired if there were plans for one. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 13, 2009 Page 6 of 13