My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 042711
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2011
>
PC 042711
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 3:14:47 PM
Creation date
7/18/2011 3:20:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/27/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
someone pay 70 percent of the family income towards their housing because then <br />nothing much would be left over for the rest of their expenses. <br /> <br />requested clarification that based on the zoning, developers <br />could also build condominiums for sale units instead of apartments. <br /> <br />Mr. Dolan confirmed that was correct. <br /> <br />20 units to the acre in land that the City has zoned for 30 units per acre. <br /> <br />Mr. Dolan said no. He explained that staff is proposing that the rezonings be done at <br />30 units per acre because the State then presumes that the City is meeting its housing <br />requirement. He added that if the City goes lower, then it must be documented. <br /> <br />Commissinquired if the 30 units per acre is the maximum. <br /> <br />Mr. Dolan replied that 30 units per acre is the minimum. He added that it can be an <br />ownership project; however, not many developers are building ownership projects at <br />30 units per acre in t. He noted that not long ago, Dublin built 86 units per <br />acre, and these projects are very nice but they are now struggling, so Dublin has <br />stopped building them. He added that 86 units per acre is not something for <br />Pleasanton. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pentin requested clarification that the City must identify the acreage by <br />August 16, 2011 in order to set housing numbers, and these 15 sites are what have <br />been identified. He inquired if the other sites that have been dropped from the list did <br />not meet the criteria or have the right scoring. <br /> <br />Mr. Dolan confirmed that August 16, 2011 is the deadline and that the other sites that <br />have been dropped from the list were those at the bottom of the list. He explained that <br />70 acres is the minimum number, and the City must provide a cushion because the <br />State may not approve all the sites. He stated that the City Council will ultimately <br />determine how close to the 70 acres the City should go, and it is unlikely that the <br />Council will want to re-zone more sites than it absolutely has to after receiving feedback <br />from the State. <br /> <br />Mr. Dolan stated that the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) process has already been <br />started and that takes some time to complete. He noted that with some exceptions, the <br />City may take a bigger pool and evaluate all of it relative to traffic. He indicated that <br />there is some flexibility in going through the process with respect to which ones make <br />the final list. <br /> <br />Mr. Dolan stated that this raises the second point <br />reaction to this is traffic. He noted that in many of the sites being considered, the <br />property already has some sort of zoning, in most cases commercial, which are being <br />PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MINUTES, April 27, 2011 Page 21 of 40 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.