PC 052511 - Laserfiche WebLink

as the rest of Hacienda is also finishing up development, he could see where Kaiser would be thinking of a garage, and other places would fill up and get more pedestrian. He indicated that this probably is the essence to the start of a parking district, where if more parking is available, and it becomes more pedestrian and no longer an end station, more people will start to commute here to work coming from elsewhere, resulting in more of that even AM and PM flow like the stations in Oakland and Berkeley. Commissioner Blank stated that he thinks this is more than just parking and trip generation, although those are part of the equation. He indicated that in preparation for projected routing of BART and timeframes. He noted that while this may not happen soon, he is certain it will happen at some point in the future. He inquired how Pleasanton would anchor the things that are there when it is no longer the end of the line and ensure that this extension is not a detriment to the community that the City is trying to build. Mr. Fleissig stated that the beauty of this system being discussed tonight is that the circulation framework Mr. Williams identified really works like a skeleton. He noted that while it is not certain how it will be built upon, the skeleton makes sense and allows for phasing, different sizes of parcels, and different uses, with the mix-and-match options to set the basic framework. He added that as people come forward, the site review can come before Planning Commission, and a developer will describe how they have met the guidelines. He indicated that he has worked with BART, and having the expectations where the City has set out a vision before BART does its RFP is such a big help of saying what the City wants. He stated that he believes that sometime in the next five to ten years, this framework will still hold and it will probably be before the extension takes place. Mr. Fleissig stated that because this is part of the zoning regulations, they have translated all the guidelines and development scenarios to include everything the City needs to have. He noted that the Planning Commission and City Council have indicated that this site is the heart of the transit village, and, therefore, it is the place where density ought to be. He indicated that if it can be demonstrated that a trip reduction, with a parking study, with those particular users, and in that particular design, could make sense, a beyond-the-base maximum of a FAR 1.0 might be allowed within the framework as impacts have not increased, and there is the flexibility to allow for a greater development. He noted that the different numbers are mathematically derived, the height limit will be maintained as it currently is, with an exception for the hotel to allow for the additional height or with the percentage, per specific site review. He added that the TOD parking minimums reflect what has already been agreed to in terms of residential live/work, visitor parking, and non-residential use with three spaces per 1,000 square feet of commercial space, and additional reductions if it can be demonstrated. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 25, 2011 Page 11 of 21