PC 062211 - Laserfiche WebLink

order to do it, the acreage must increase from 5.3 to 11.5, and it makes sense in that regard. He added that with regard to making it more concentrated in one area, it is where the land is available. noted Chair Narum's statement that the owners tried to bring up the acreage from 5.3 to 11.5 at all the Sites meetings and asked Chair Narum and Commission Pearce, who were at all the Task Force meetings, how much discussion raising the 5.3 acres to 11 acres got at the meetings. Commissioner Pearce replied that the Task Force had a number of meetings regarding the Sites and went site by site on a number of suggestions. She recalled that there was some discussion about this site at a later meeting and believes a vote was taken regarding whether or not the Task Force wanted to increase it to 11.5 acres. She noted that it was not met with a majority vote at that time and that the 5.3 acres was the proposal presented at the community outreach meetings she attended. Chair Narum concurred that this was her recollection, as well. noted that if the Commission did recommend 11.5 acres, this does not mean that when it returns from HCD the City must rezone all 11.5 acres, but it just gives the City more flexibility. Mr. Dolan stated that was correct. Commissioner Blank commented that the City would still have the same flexibility if the Commission left it at 5.3 acres. Chair Narum stated that it bears mentioning there was one piece of this that happened at the last minute at the last Task Force meeting. She referred to the Kiewit (Site 11) and Legacy Partners (Site 14) representatives agreeing to participate in the East Pleasanton Specific Plan process and not develop until that was done, assuming the Specific Plan was completed within a reasonable timeframe. She added that the Task Force also looked at the Vintage Hills Shopping Center, also in that part of town, which was taken off at the last meeting. She noted that the whole process was very fluid and kept moving because there was so little time with ten members in the room coming in from different directions. noted that when the Commission was discussing the site for all retail, many people came out and attended the meetings because of the major impact from a traffic standpoint. He pointed out that there was discussion on widening of streets and adding turn lanes and acceleration lanes. He indicated that while he understands housing has some school impact that retail does not, he thought that majority of all the complaints raised the last time involved traffic impacts. He added that he thought the Commission heard school impacts from higher density, but it is expected there will be less children in these types of development compared to the lower density and single-family homes that were built in the past. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, June 22, 2011 Page 23 of 33