PC 032801 - Laserfiche WebLink

regional issues, noting that there is a comment in the staff report which states that regional issues ,.-- remain, and these will not be readily solved whether Pleasanton grows fast, slow, or not at all. He noted that the problem is that every locality thinks the same way and when each locality continues to grow anyway that creates the regional issues. Discussion ensued regarding the over-crowding at the high school level. Commissioner Maas suggested that consideration be given to Option 6, with the modification that both Centex projects be placed in the "first-come, first-served" category for 2001, 2002, and 2003; 24 units be included each year for 2002 and 2003 for the New Cities project; and 18 units for the GreenbriarIHeinz project be allowed in 2002. She noted that her recommended totals for growth management allocations would be: 358 units for 2001,396 units for 2002, and less than the 350 benchmark total units for years 2003 and 2004. Mr. Swift advised that he feels without the certainty of a major project allocation, Centex would probably not be able to obtain financing to proceed and there would be no Vineyard Corridor projects going forward. - Chairperson Sullivan suggested that consideration be given to Option 4. He noted that in accordance with the General Plan and direction from the City Council last year, the Planning Commission needs to strive to get to a total allocation of350 units per year. He stated that he agrees with staff that the Vineyard Corridor needs to be developed in an orderly fashion due to the significant community benefit of the school. He stated that he believes it is much more important to build out the Vineyard Corridor then the remainder of the Happy Valley/Sycamore area. He advised that he would like to see 350 units per year as a maximum, priority given to the Vineyard Corridor (however, he is not sure about the Heinz property), and the "first-come, first- served" allocations utilized to get the Vineyard Corridor projects built, and move the New CitiesIHappy Valley proj ects to later years. Chairperson Sullivan stated that he would like to explore the idea of allowing additional allocations over the 350 units if additional amenities are provided to the City, (e.g., providing homes that would have on-site energy generation, with no impact on the grid; or providing funding to alleviate over-crowding at the high schools, or mitigate transportation or air quality impacts). Commissioner Maas stated that she likes Chairperson Sullivan's idea, but she is not sure that it is right to do this after project approval has been granted. In response to a question as to whether this proposal is legal, Ms. Seto stated that it is not unlike how the current program prioritizes for affordable housing, and it could be done by providing an allocation for projects that provide a different kind of amenity. She noted that it is o.k. to do this if it is done on a voluntary basis. Commissioner Maas stated that she would not feel comfortable implementing this recommendation of projects that already approved. Commissioner Arkin stated that he likes the concept presented by Chairperson Sullivan. He suggested that he would like to see a mechanism that allows a purchase of credits for units over 350 from future years, and that the funds from the purchase of the credits could be used to address the concerns stated by Chairperson Sullivan. ,.-- PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 28, 2001 Page 7