CCMIN082112 - Laserfiche WebLink

She reported that staff received an email from a commercial neighbor of the CM Capital Properties site requesting fencing or other impediments along the arroyo to prevent their site from being walked across. While staff understands the concern, they do not necessarily support making impediments to accessing the arroyo and have suggested particular text amendments as shown on the slide, rather than what was presented in the Council packet. Ms. Stern reviewed several small changes based on a discussion with a Councilrnember earlier today. She referred to page 9, which discusses open space requirements for projects of 40-45 dwelling units per acre. Understanding that staff does not contemplate densities of that range coming forward for this site, staff feels comfortable deleting that paragraph. Clarifying text would be added to a paragraph on the same page stating that the maximum height of 65 feet would accommodate 5 stories and that there would be a limit on the number of stories allowed. Councilmember McGovern asked how the maximum number of total units identified in red on Table 2.1 compares to RHNA requirements. Mr. Dolan stated that the minimum densities satisfy RHNA. Councilmember McGovern shared her frustration that she had been under the impression she was agreeing to densities in order to meet RHNA and now finds that they are considering additional units beyond what is required. Mr. Dolan reiterated his earlier explanation. Councilmember McGovern asked what density was approved for the BRE project. Mr. Dolan said 30 units per acre but also noted that the site had a maximum density of roughly 55 units per acre. Councilmember McGovern doubted that she ever approved 55 units per acre for the BRE site. Ms. Stern concluded her presentation, requesting that the Council receive public comment, make any desired changes to the proposed Standards and Guidelines, and introduce the 9 ordinances identified in the staff report. Mr. Fialho said he sensed a lot of confusion and wanted to be clear that the Council previously rezoned these sites at the minimum density to meet RHNA and that this is reflected in the City's adopted Housing Element. The Council then adopted the SEIR, which included a maximum range of units, and that cannot be undone. What the Council has the ability to do is to establish parameters around the range of units allowed, which would cancel out what was adopted in the SEIR. He felt that a 5-unit range seemed plausible and consistent with what was previously approved. Vice-Mayor Thorne opened the public hearing. Ralph F. said this is a very confusing and frustrating matter for those who have just come to the table. He asked how the units presented here relate to the 2,058 units ABAG has said that Pleasanton must build for the 2014-2022 planning period. Mr. Fialho explained that the number Mr. F. referenced is a new RHNA allocation that is still in draft form and not related to the units presented here. Mr. F. asked how many RHNA units are represented in this action. City Council Minutes Page 13 of 19 August 21,2012