My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 092513
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2013
>
PC 092513
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 3:57:17 PM
Creation date
8/10/2017 3:50:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
9/25/2013
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
45
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Commissioner Allen asked Mr. Tassano to comment on what would be the expected <br />impact on traffic to the degree that there is senior housing, and what it means to the <br />community from a traffic perspective. <br />Mr. Tassano replied that senior housing takes fewer trips during the peak hours, even <br />for 55- and -older communities, where sometimes only one of the two people are <br />working, which means fewer peak -hour trips. He indicated that the data just shows that <br />seniors do not make as many trips. He noted that that was the assumption made on the <br />new senior community up on Stoneridge Drive which is not yet constructed. He added <br />that the City has existing senior facilities that produce fewer trips. <br />Commissioner Posson referred to the issue of schools and inquired if the impact on <br />schools is one of the impacts evaluated in the EIR process. <br />Mr. Dolan replied that there will be an analysis but that it is pretty simple and is really <br />already accomplished. He indicated that the School District knows what kind of child <br />yield it gets out of every unit, and that factor is used to identify how many children there <br />are per household and at what level. He added that that information in included, but <br />CEQA law basically says that mitigation shall be payment of the State impact fees. He <br />indicated that the City has been very fortunate that the School District has been able to <br />negotiate higher payment, but there is some acknowledgment among almost all the <br />parties that it is not necessarily adequate. He added that it is a dilemma, but the reality <br />is the RHNA numbers keep coming; the City tried to fight them and lost, and that is how <br />the City got in this deficit and how the City ended up losing so much rezoning and so <br />much land recently, and why the new cycle is upon the City so quickly because the City <br />did not do the last time in a timely fashion. <br />Referring to the fiscal feasibility reports, Commissioner Posson noted that they were a <br />draft and that it is his understanding that that is because of the uncertainties and it was <br />just to get us within the ballpark. <br />Mr. Dolan said that is correct. <br />Commissioner Posson noted that Mr. Dolan mentioned that the School District came <br />back with its "Asks" and what they want to see as far as the overall program. He <br />inquired if that significantly skews the draft fiscal analysis or if that is still in the ballpark <br />of feasibility with the new data. <br />Mr. Dolan replied that it is a big "Ask," and the Council has to decide what it is going to <br />do about it, and if it says yes, then the City will burden this development with all those <br />costs, and it will be a game changer. <br />Commissioner O'Connor asked Mr. Dolan if he can enlighten the Commission as to <br />what all those "Asks" are. <br />Mr. Dolan replied that the District asked for free land and someone to build the school. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 25, 2013 Page 39 of 45 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.