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
Commissioner Piper inquired if the recent change in ownership is a result of the zoning <br />change in the sense that it made it more desirable for that owner at the time to sell the <br />property now because it is mixed -use. <br />Mr. Dolan replied that it has changed hands since it was rezoned so it was purchased <br />with the new zoning. <br />Commissioner Piper asked Mr. Dolan if he said it was for a minimum of 30 units per <br />acre. <br />Mr. Dolan said yes. He explained that the property has to be zoned for a minimum of <br />30 units per acres for HCD to presume that you are providing an opportunity to build <br />housing that is affordable. <br />Ms. Wallis stated that it has been shown that anything less than 20 units typically <br />cannot pencil out to include affordable units. She added that HCD has set that standard <br />at 30 units for a project to pencil out to include affordable units. <br />Commissioner Piper commented that it almost seems like they would have to build up <br />and not out. <br />Mr. Dolan stated that there is always the opportunity to have lower density to meet a <br />different category. He indicated, however, that when the City was doing all the <br />rezonings back in 2010 through 2012, staff went to a lower density in order to meet the <br />RHNA requirement, as the City's big need and big deficit then was in the <br />30- units - per -acre category. He noted that staff calculated the next category down last <br />time at 23 units per acre. He added that there may be some flexibility, for example, <br />documenting the projects at 20 units per acre to produce units that are affordable to <br />people in the moderate income category. He indicated that one can also just say that <br />neither of those categories are being considered for this site; it's all the <br />above - moderate, which means market -rate. He point out that it is just units, and it can <br />be done at whatever density desired. He stated that at a certain point, it gets ridiculous <br />to make that land that close to all those services and BART super -low density; it would <br />be a waste of land with all those attributes. <br />Commissioner Piper asked Mr. Dolan to address it from a number of stories aspect. <br />Mr. Dolan replied that with respect to determining what the residential zoning could be, <br />the 30- unit - per -acre product cannot be done without a good chunk of three stories, and <br />a few four -story components are needed as well. <br />Chair O'Connor asked Mr. Dolan if he remembers what the height of the first phase of <br />CM Capital was. He recalled that it had a four -story component and asked how many <br />feet tall the high point was. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, June 25, 2014 Page 23 of 29 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.