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
4.4. Impact on the Uses of Vacant Parcels of Land <br /> The impact of the Initiative on vacant land would be mainly limited to those hillside <br /> residential parcels listed in Section 4.1, above,and to potential"receiver parcels"which <br /> may benefit from the allocation of additional units. Without for Initiative,those <br /> housi hillside <br /> parcels would seek planned unit development(PUD) <br /> units based on their existing General Plan land use designations, modified through the <br /> California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)and public <br /> Initiative is adopted,the development potential of these properties would be significantly <br /> reduced, in some cases to no more than ten units.2i <br /> Table 1, above, shows the maximum development potential and the estimated numbers of <br /> housing units that would be possible under the Initiative,thus demonstrating the <br /> estimated impact of the Initiative. If those "lost" 119 to 224 hillside units then became <br /> available in other locations, such as the Downtown or within Hacienda Business i Park, <br /> those vacant"receiver"parcels would benefit by obtaining <br /> increased development potential under the housing cap. However,to the extent that <br /> assisted living units are determined by the Initiative to count as housing units under the <br /> housing cap, this increased development potential on"receive?'parcels would be <br /> eliminated, and there would be fewer conventional housing units to be built under the <br /> housing cap. <br /> The impact on the use of vacant parcels of land would also be felt by d acente ropert <br /> owners. Reduced development potential on hill area properties <br /> development impacts on neighbors who would not experience the same extent of <br /> development as they now might expect. Similarly,adding more development to other <br /> "receiver" properties elsewhere in the City may create additional development impacts <br /> not currently planned for. Any such impacts would have to be mitigated as part of the <br /> development process for"receiver" properties. <br /> 4.5. Impact on Agricultural Lands,Open Space,Traffic Congestion, and <br /> Existing Business Districts <br /> If the on those is adopted,properties listed in Table 1.development <br /> This wthan sult in anticipated <br /> open space on in the General <br /> those properties those hill area P P <br /> those properties than has been expected, although some development will still occur. To <br /> the extent that development on those properties is located on the relatively flat, lower <br /> portions of the sites, the remaining open space may continue to be used for grazing <br /> purposes,thus increasing the amount of agricultural land in the hill areas. <br /> The impact of the hillside development provisions of the Initiative on traffic will not be <br /> significant from a citywide perspective. As stated above, the total number of residential <br /> units in the community as a whole will remain the same with or without the Initiative; <br /> only the distribution and type of units will change. Given that the City's residential land <br /> 23 See also Sections 5.1 and 5.16. <br /> 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.