02 - Laserfiche WebLink

City Manager Fialho presented an example noting during the recent storms, man-made structures in the arroyo paved area were damaged and it will be a year before the permitting agencies allow the City to replace the structures. In response to Councilmember Narum's question regarding allowing residential behind commercial, Director of Community Development Beaudin explained it would be allowed, including on Main Street, as a PUD, which has conflicting policies and would be a community conversation. He added there are policies and standards that address on-site development compatibility between two properties including visibility from the street. Additionally, if a downtown property owner comes forward after the document is certified, a program-level EIR will significantly reduce the environmental analysis that has to go into a project application, once adopted and certified it will available to all property owners. In further response to Councilmember Narum, Mr. Beaudin reported a mixed-use transitional project would not require a PUD if development standards are met and explained the number of units for the Shell Station and Barone properties in terms of residential density and assumptions necessary for environmental review. Brief discussion followed regarding the different levels of environmental review depending on the type application and its location. Any property in Downtown Commercial could have the benefit of a programmatic EIR for proposed redevelop. Councilmember Brown addressed visual impacts of residences behind commercial uses in terms of street view noting the need to look at different angles to evaluate visibility. Director of Community Development Beaudin reported the 2002 plan does not have as many policies relative to compatibility and in-fill development. Staff has taken into consideration full visual impacts from many different points. He confirmed housing space holders could be higher than what is listed but would trigger additional environmental analysis. In response to Councilmember Brown's question regarding the process for handling soil contamination in terms at the Shell Station, Mr. Beaudin said it would be handled the same manner as any other gas station and explained the process. City Manager Fialho added that the Environmental Services Agency of Alameda County is responsible for site clearance. In response to Councilmember Testa regarding whether supporting planning documents are incorporated into the Downtown Specific Plan, Director of Community Development Beaudin reported some are incorporated by reference and others directly incorporated, depending on the document and defined pedestrian scale. Brief discussion followed regarding hard limits set in terms of the estimated number of maximum units allowed. Councilmember Testa asked about the risk of future State legislation to the Downtown Specific Plan to which Mr. Beaudin explained impacts of the ACE and BART stations and addressed exemptions requested by the City. He added that until the City sees the legislation on SB 4 and SB 50, the City is just speculating about the potential impacts. Brief discussion followed regarding suggested amendments to the legislation to increase protection of Pleasanton. City Manager Fialho noted it is hard to predict what the impacts of the legislation will be. He added the legislation is complex, is a moving target, and the City must very careful moving along the process. Councilmember Testa requested an impact analysis of future legislation and asked about the impact of an overlay if a project is 100% residential versus 99%. Mr. Beaudin explained that residential and mixed-use projects would be subject to a PUD, a commercial project meeting all development standards would be a design review. In response to Mayor Thorne's question, Director of Community Development Beaudin reported design reviews are appealable. Mayor Thorne opened public comment. City Council Minutes Page 4 of 12 May 7, 2019