My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
03
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2021
>
050421
>
03
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/29/2021 3:44:44 PM
Creation date
4/29/2021 3:44:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
5/4/2021
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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).
View images
View plain text
Associate Planner Hagen advised the planned timeline will start immediately with kick-off meetings to <br /> be held between LWC and FCS and the Council, Housing Commission, and Planning Commission <br /> within the first two months with ultimate completion by the January 2023 deadline. <br /> In response to Councilmember Balch's inquiry, Director Clark confirmed there will be a consideration for <br /> changing maximum densities. City Manager Fialho clarified 30 units per acre is the City's default but <br /> not necessarily its preference for low to very low-income units. He noted the City did identify sites <br /> during the last RHNA cycle to go up to 40 or 45 units per acre. <br /> In response to Councilmember Balch's inquiries, Director Clark confirmed the City's 20% figure for <br /> Inclusionary Affordable Housing is potentially something to reconsider as well. She confirmed the <br /> proposed timeline is appropriate to get to the January 2023 deadline so long as the City is efficient. <br /> In response to Councilmember Narum's inquiries, Director Clark clarified the Planning Commission <br /> would do the heavy lifting onsite selection based on direction from prior Council meetings. She advised <br /> there are many LWC check-in points with the Council along the way and noted the Housing <br /> Commission is also involved in the site selection process. She confirmed the 2012 Task Force criteria <br /> will be used as a starting point for LWC and advised East Pleasanton will be an important part of the <br /> site discussion as to how the RHNA numbers will work in conjunction with the Working Plan the City <br /> paused for the pandemic. <br /> In response to Councilmember Testa's inquiries, Director Clark clarified there are limitations in using <br /> sites included in the Housing Element for previous cycles. She advised there are ways through the <br /> zoning process to continue to include these sites and noted new sites can be added if there is an <br /> adjustment to the density standards. She explained the City would be creative and hopes to reuse <br /> many previously identified sites. She noted several sites will fall out of contention because HCD will not <br /> accept them due to use in prior cycles. She reported staff started some preliminary analysis when the <br /> number was only 4,900 units and estimated 800-1,500 viable sites could be reused in the current cycle. <br /> She reiterated there will be a new cycle in 2023 and the existing unmet needs from the current cycle <br /> will not be added on. <br /> In response to Councilmember Testa's inquiry, Director Clark clarified there was a change at the state <br /> level stating in a CEQA analysis Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) can only be considered for a threshold <br /> in traffic impact. She further explained that intersection-level impacts can no longer be considered for <br /> CEQA purposes. She noted the City can still analyze this for supplemental information to present to the <br /> Council for consideration, but it cannot be used to base significant findings in the El R. <br /> In response to Councilmember Arkin's inquiry, Director Clark confirmed the City will be proactive in <br /> reaching out to commercial property owners for potential site redevelopments. She advised there is an <br /> existing list maintained by Associate Planner Hagen of people who have expressed interest in housing <br /> projects on their commercial sites. Councilmember Arkin remarked it resonates strongly with HCD <br /> when property owners are willing to redevelop. <br /> In response to Councilmember Arkin's inquiry, Director Clark believes the City can meet the next RHNA <br /> cycle's allocations. She advised it will be a challenge requiring strategic thinking about site densities <br /> and making the most of available sites. She advised HCD and especially ABAG recognize the <br /> challenge for almost every city in the Bay Area and is offering resources between grant funding and <br /> technical resources to work cooperatively with HCD. She added HCD cannot be too strict with site <br /> selection approvals or many cities will have non-complying Housing Elements. <br /> In response to Councilmember Arkin's inquiries, Director Clark confirmed impacts on schools, services, <br /> utilities, transportation, and other areas will be considered in site selection. She advised the Council is <br /> going to have some very difficult decisions to make because there is no way to add 6,000 housing units <br /> without impacting schools. She acknowledged the City will have to collaborate with PUSD to address <br /> City Council Minutes Page 7 of 15 March 16. 2021 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.