My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
_Minutes_August 25, 2021
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2020 - PRESENT
>
2021
>
09-22
>
_Minutes_August 25, 2021
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/15/2021 11:03:39 AM
Creation date
9/15/2021 11:03:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
9/22/2021
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
(JDEDZ) area would be considered as infill. Ms. Clark stated it would likely be considered infill <br /> because it was existing developed land. <br /> Commissioner Allen asked about Criteria 6a related to neighborhood compatibility and <br /> increased building stories. Ms. Clark confirmed the assumption in the criteria that high density <br /> would be three stories. <br /> Commissioner Nibert thanked staff for its efforts throughout the process and for the <br /> presentation. He discussed the scoring criteria and its intent to present a simplistic framework <br /> to be used for site selection and asked its effectiveness. Ms. Clark reiterated the scoring was a <br /> starting point, to be later complemented with considerations including public input, site <br /> capacity, and characteristics. Commissioner Nibert inquired about potential sites that might be <br /> attractive but not captured with scoring criteria and if more could be captured with enhanced <br /> criteria. Ms. Clark discussed the Housing Commission's mention of additional criteria but <br /> cautioned the Commission to consider limiting criteria to reduce complexity of reviewing <br /> multiple sites. Commissioner Nibert suggested enhancing factors be noted for discussion <br /> purpose. Ms. Clark anticipated the scores to be reported back with more analysis. <br /> Commissioner Nibert asked about criteria excluded compared to the previous cycle, <br /> particularly economic interest. Ms. Clark explained the criteria added by the Housing Element <br /> Task Force for consideration of the potential fiscal impacts due to converting commercial sites <br /> with freeway proximity. Commissioner Nibert asked about major criteria inconsistent with <br /> General Plan themes which was not included in the current cycle. Ms. Clark explained that the <br /> criteria as drafted reflected the guiding principles which reflect themes of the General Plan, <br /> such as sustainability and character. She suggested additional considerations, including <br /> General Plan policies for topics like aesthetics were details to be considered in the next round. <br /> Commissioner Morgan asked if all sites of a specific size would be assessed whether or not <br /> the owner was interested in selling the property. Ms. Clark explained that staff planned to start <br /> with sites where there was known owner interest in housing. She stated GIS-based analysis <br /> and underutilized commercial properties would be considered if needed. She stated many of <br /> the churches had residential zoning and were potentially in the baseline inventory for potential <br /> future residential. Commissioner Morgan asked if the inventory was primarily based on vacant <br /> properties or underutilized properties, such as an older business park with expansive parking <br /> and landscaping, which could be converted. Ms. Clark stated underutilized aging malls and <br /> office parks would be considered due to limited vacant sites in the City. Commissioner Morgan <br /> asked if commercial sites would be rezoned. Ms. Clark discussed the mixed-use zoning to <br /> allow for either commercial or residential. Commissioner Morgan asked if a property could be <br /> zoned for 100-percent affordable housing rather than a mix of affordable and market housing. <br /> Ms. Clark stated her opinion that it was unlikely that the State would consider a required <br /> 100-percent affordable housing as feasible zoning, since it may be seen as too restrictive or <br /> economically unfeasible. <br /> Chair Brown confirmed there were 600 replies to the housing survey and inquired if any related <br /> to selection criteria. Ms. Clark stated the survey questions offered the opportunity to comment <br /> on preferred and specific locations. Chair Brown suggested the survey results be provided <br /> prior to final decisions. Ms. Clark suggested the criteria be determined based on guiding <br /> principles and the survey results would be available well before the matter comes back before <br /> the Planning Commission. Chair Brown mentioned the Housing Commission's comments and <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 10 August 25, 2021 <br />