Laserfiche WebLink
The site is in the Downtown Specific Plan area. As 30 units per acre would <br />require three or four stories, that density may not be appropriate at this location. <br />What might be more suitable for the area is to develop some moderate-income <br />housing with 23 units per acre, which might be two to three stories. <br /> <br />Site 18: Downtown (SF site) <br /> <br /> This three-acre property is located across the street from the Pleasanton Library <br />and is owned by the City and County of San Francisco. Subsequent to the <br />Community workshops, the Task Force, at its March meeting, decided to <br />reconsider this site that was on list earlier, since Site 5 and Site 15 have been <br />withdrawn from the list. <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. <br /> <br />Site 15 <br />Dick Vesperman, speaking on behalf of the owners of , Valley Trails Church, <br />acknowledged that workshops were held and comments were received at those <br />workshops regarding the site. He expressed concern that these comments were <br />accepted uncritically and that he believes there were many misstatements made which <br />have not been evaluated by the City, but rather accepted at face value. He indicated <br />that he had previously sent information to the Housing Task Force with respect to these <br />concerns, and he presented correspondence reiterating those problems. <br /> <br />Mr. Vesperman stated that he is also very concerned with the way the site was rescored <br />at the last Housing Element Task Force meeting, indicating that the reasons given for it <br />were not valid. He indicated that there were any number of problems with them, and as <br />he heard tonight for first time, many of those decisions were made prior to the meeting <br />and not at the meeting. He disputed the action of the Task Force at the last meeting to <br />drop the Valley Trails Church site from the list of sites under consideration and <br />requested that when the summary of workshop comments are distributed, his rebuttal to <br />alongside so that misinformation that went out from the workshop does not stand <br />uncorrected and is perpetuated to the detriment of both the Task Force and the City. <br /> <br />Site 12 <br />Brian Casey stated that his home backs up to . He stated that while he respects <br />and compliments the City of Pleasanton and the State of California for addressing the <br />affordable housing issue, there continues to be a concern from his family and neighbors <br />regarding Site 12; the Goodnight Inn. He reminded the Commission that this property <br />was before the City Council two to three years ago, and the Council at that time turned <br />down a proposal to construct 42 condominium units at the site. He asked why it would <br />then continue to be on the list for low-income housing. <br /> <br />Mr. Casey stated that at March 30, 2011 workshop, some members of the Task Force <br />There are units there todaynot sure how manybut there <br />arHe noted that, for the record, there are 28-30 units in the hotel today with <br />transitional visitors. He added that if multi-family housing is approved at the site, there <br />PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MINUTES, April 27, 2011 Page 12 of 40 <br /> <br />