Laserfiche WebLink
From: ncallen@comcast.net <ncallen@comcast.net> <br />Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2019 7:40 AM <br />To: Stefanie Ananthan <sananthan@cityofpleasantonca.gov>; Gerry Beaudin <br /><gbeaudin@cityofpleasantonca.gov>; Ellen Clark <eclark@cityofpleasantonca.gov> <br />Cc: ncallen@comcast.net <br />Subject: FW: DSP Draft EIR - pls use THIS version (not one i emailed late last night) <br /> <br />Hi, <br />PLs disregard my email from last night and use this version for our minutes. Thx <br />Nancy <br />Hello, <br /> <br />The DSP task force recommended a number of changes to the DSP plan at their Feb. 27th meeting that <br />were different than their earlier plan when the EIR assumptions were created. If approved these <br />changes could significantly increase the buildable square footage and also the number of potential <br />residential units that could be built in our core commercial district vs. existing zoning. And I assume <br />they could increase impacts beyond what was assumed in the draft EIR <br /> <br />Please clarify in the final EIR what the incremental impact is based on the new zoning changes the task <br />force recommended at the Feb. 27 meeting (see below) vs. what was assumed when the draft EIR was <br />written: <br />1. Changing zoning to allow ground floor residential in commercial district behind commercial <br />storefronts (if not very visible) <br />1. And at an FAR of 300% <br />2. Increasing FAR in many commercial district areas beyond existing FAR limits– in some case <br />doubling or more the potential buildable space. Also, may increase parking risks. <br />3. Increasing building height over what was assumed in draft EIR in some areas, which could <br />potentially increase residential units <br />3.1. Includes potential of eliminating the 30 feet threshold for residential that exists today to 40 feet or <br />more. <br />4. The proposal to included Barone’s and Shell on Map A and allow residential. This will likely <br />add more units/bedrooms than in the base plan (30-40?). <br />4.1. Although traffic volumes may not be higher than commercial use, reducing vibrant retail space in <br />core downtown seems contrary to DSP goals on increasing vibrancy. Adding 2-3 dozen homes could also <br />likely create overflow parking issues on our city streets. <br /> <br />Therefore, I request the following items be addressed for each of these proposed zoning changes – <br />WORST case analysis <br />A. Additional residential units (and # bedrooms) vs. today and vs. draft EIR <br />B. Additional buildable square footage vs. today and vs. draft EIR <br />C. Additional traffic vs. today and vs. draft EIR with added incremental units <br />D. Additional parking required vs. today and vs. draft EIR