My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01 ATTACHMENTS
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2012
>
112712 Special Meeting
>
01 ATTACHMENTS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/16/2012 4:42:30 PM
Creation date
11/16/2012 4:42:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
11/27/2012
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
ATTACHMENTS
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
99
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).
View images
View plain text
The major hill area developments remaining in the City that would be potentially <br /> impacted by the Initiative are as follows: <br /> Table 1 <br /> Project <br /> Maximum Estimated Net Unit Development Development Transfer from <br /> Areas <br /> Under Initiative <br /> )11's ' ►U's a t U's <br /> Lund II 86 5 10 b default <br /> Lester 39 0 10 b default <br /> Spotorno Upper 81 11 <br /> Valley —Current <br /> GP 63 <br /> Spotorno Flat— 79 <br /> proposed GP/SP <br /> Amendment 18 1 10 b default <br /> File <br /> Oak Grove 51 <br /> 0 10 b default <br /> Total 51/103 119-224 <br /> Transferring residential development from hillside properties to infill properties would <br /> not impact the City's ability to meet its current regional housing needs since the self- <br /> imposed limit to our Regional Housing Needs Allocation(RHNA)is 29,001)units—the <br /> housing cap. However,to the extent that 119 to 224 hillside units are developed in infill <br /> areas of the City rather than the hillsides, it is likely that such units would be higher <br /> density, multiple family dwellings or smaller single family homes; some would likely be <br /> able to qualify as very low, low, and/or moderate income units. This would help <br /> Pleasanton in attaining our lower income share of the RHNA numbers. <br /> u •.,Q t t it Definition <br /> Regarding the portion of the Initiative that defines"housing unit", the question has been <br /> raised as to whether assisted living units and second units must be included as"housing <br /> units"and therefore counted towards the housing cap.13 (See also Section 5.20, below.) <br /> ' Number of potential dwelling units per General Plan Midpoint Density <br /> ' Number of units estimated under Initiative based on developer's estimate of minimum <br /> ' Initiative does not appear to affect Spotorno Flan estimate <br /> number of units needed to fiord Bypass Road. Verification of developer assumptions have not been <br /> confirmed by staff at this time. It is also questionable whether the Initiative precludes the Bypass Road <br /> (see Section project Dwelling Units(DU)based on approved project <br /> Total Assuming project o Upper Valley" Total with Spotorno Upper Valley and Oak Grove/Total with Spommo Flat without Oak Grove <br /> '= Total with Spotorno Upper Valley/Total with Spotorno Flat <br /> " The application of the Initiative's definition of"housing unit"would be prospective oily for new <br /> projects,as the Initiative did not include language specifically providing for retroactivity. <br /> 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.