My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 062514
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2014
>
PC 062514
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 4:16:41 PM
Creation date
8/10/2017 4:12:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
6/25/2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
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
compatible with those guidelines. He indicated that he also went through the Housing <br />Element and did a word search on "adjacent neighborhood" and did not find any. He <br />stated that he is illustrating the level of concern that his neighborhood has that this <br />particular property does not fit in this place and is not in keeping with the history of the <br />zoning and the building guidelines of the Business Park. <br />Jane Bowen stated that her family moved to the neighborhood in 1985 and are original <br />owners of the property, which backs up to the Arroyo. She pointed out again that the <br />Pleasanton voters have historically, clearly, and strongly favored a plan of slow growth <br />and that the City even fought to protect that plan in the lawsuit against Urban Habitat <br />though that was resolved through a settlement. She noted that in slowing growth, the <br />City has done the Growth Management Program which she thinks is a good idea; <br />however, more parcels have already been rezoned beyond what the RHNA <br />requirements are. She added that these properties are sitting out there, and the City <br />does not have any control over them; it is up to the property owner to do what they want <br />with them, given they have the rezoning. She stated that what this means is that more <br />property can be built in excess of the RHNA requirement over this next cycle. <br />Ms. Bowen stated that the Parkside neighborhood is particularly concerned with the CM <br />Capital property at 5758 West Las Positas Boulevard, and it is their desire to reverse <br />the zoning on that property to "Commercial' only. She indicated that it is right next door <br />to the Summerhill project which seems to be going forward, even though she is <br />wondering if there is an issue with the height issue. She added that she does not <br />believe the neighbors were notified that that height restriction was going to be changed <br />and not going to be followed for these rezoned properties. She stated that those two <br />properties together make up over 12 acres, which is almost double any other <br />high- density project in the Business Park, and would be right next door to each other <br />with a combined 378 housing units. She indicated that this is unprecedented anywhere <br />else in the City, right across the street from Hart Middle School. She continued that <br />there currently are 699 high- density housing units existing or in the process of being <br />built within .7 miles on West Las Positas Boulevard: the Summerhill project, the Nearon <br />site across the street and slightly down, the existing Springhouse Apartments, and the <br />Verona condominiums with another 151 units, for a total of 850 units. She added that <br />the CM Capital property building would bring it up to over 1,000 units in just over half a <br />mile. She indicated that this creates a high- density corridor in the City, all on one street <br />across from a middle school. She pointed out that this detracts from the character of <br />Pleasanton, overburdens its schools, burdens traffic, and strains the limited water <br />resources. <br />Ms. Bowen stated that when high- density housing was discussed earlier, the idea was <br />to spread it around the City, and that is not what they are seeing; it is concentrated in <br />the Business Park. She indicated that she understands there are reasons for that with <br />BART being located there, but there were already four projects going forward in the <br />Business Park, with at least one more approved and how many others that have <br />actually been rezoned and have not yet come forward. She stated that what they are <br />asking is that this particular property be rezoned as it backs up to the Arroyo and their <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, June 25, 2014 Page 19 of 29 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.