20 - Laserfiche WebLink

recommended for residential development if part of a larger site. This new additional criteria is included as Criteria 7b. Other Requests In addition to the direct modifications to the selection criteria, the Planning Commission requested staff work with the Pleasanton Unified School District (PUSD) to ensure appropriate methods are used for determining over enrollment that extends over a single year (since enrollments can fluctuate year-on-year), and attempt to better define what would be considered "significant tree removal." Staff indicated to the Planning Commission the tree removal criteria may need to remain somewhat more subjective, given development plans and site-specific tree surveys will not be available for most sites. However, staff is otherwise supportive of all of the recommended changes proposed by the Planning Commission, which have been incorporated into Attachment 1. General Plan Conformance Staff wishes to highlight a change proposed in the criteria for this first round of scoring, to delete the previously included criterion: "Potential Inconsistency with General Plan Themes." This criterion referenced and cited a number of specific General Plan policies around sustainability and community character; avoiding impingement of new development on open space and agricultural lands; and avoidance of hazards. Attachment 2 includes a list of the General Plan policies previously referenced in the scoring criteria, for reference. Analysis for conformance with the General Plan and the referenced policies, and other policies relevant to decision-making on the sites inventory (such as policies which more explicitly encourage development to be focused within the existing urbanized portions of the city, and to maintain appropriate transitions and buffers between differing land uses); will be an extremely important consideration for the overall sites evaluation. As currently written, however, a meaningful policy evaluation at this early stage would involve a complex, and in many instances somewhat subjective, evaluation across a diverse range of topics. Staff believes the policy considerations important at this phase are well - addressed by criteria already included, and on an objective basis to the extent possible. For example, the infill, transit proximity, and infrastructure criteria favor sites within the urbanized portion of the city, versus on greenfield sites; and the comparative height and FAR criteria explicitly address neighborhood compatibility.6 As noted, the City Council will ultimately select sites for final inclusion in the inventory that meet the City's assigned RHNA and the requirements of state law (among other considerations), are located on sites with relatively fewer community impacts, and are most consistent with Pleasanton's General Plan goals and policies. Request The City Council is requested to review and approve the initial housing sites selection criteria for the 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Housing Element Update. 6 Additional analysis in topic areas as views and aesthetics will be completed as part of the CEQA review, and will be brought forward for consideration in future evaluation phases. Page 8 of 12