Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner Nibert agreed that high density development would need to be around <br /> Stoneridge Mall and Hacienda and close to BART, to receive tax credits. He suggested <br /> creative solutions to attain the RHNA numbers. <br /> Commissioner Gaidos stated higher density was necessary to fulfill the State's requirements. <br /> Commissioner Pace concurred with the need for density due to the State's requirements. He <br /> asked if the City could do something to help developers obtain funding. <br /> Commissioner Allen agreed that high density development was necessary in the right <br /> locations. She suggested a standard of minimum affordability. <br /> Commissioner Morgan stated he was encouraged about the possibility of high-density <br /> developments in appropriate areas without being detrimental to the community. He expressed <br /> concern that those projects did not currently exist and stated the need to be thoughtful with <br /> higher density standards and projects. <br /> Chair Brown stated high density needed to support affordable housing. He discussed the <br /> importance of location near transit centers and grocery stores, as well as the capacity of <br /> existing infrastructure. <br /> MATTERS FOR COMMISSION'S REVIEW/ACTION/INFORMATION <br /> 4. Reports from Meetings Attended (e.g., Committee, Task Force, etc.) <br /> There were no reports from meetings attended. <br /> 5. Actions of the City Council <br /> Ms. Clark provided a brief overview of the items listed in the report. <br /> 6. Future Planning Calendar <br /> Planning and Permit Center Manager Melinda Denis gave a brief overview of future items for <br /> the Commission's review. <br /> MATTERS INITIATED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS <br /> Commissioner Nibert discussed several Bay Area cities that had appealed the RHNA numbers. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 of 10 September 8, 2021 <br /> of the project, and higher density on smaller sites to make the project financially feasible. <br /> Commissioner Allen asked if a six-story development was feasible downtown. Mr. Williams <br /> discussed the downtown in Mountain View and floor area ratio restrictions. He discussed <br /> potential development in downtown Pleasanton and whether it could be four stories. Ms. Clark <br /> discussed the height limitations in the Downtown Specific Plan, and its very specific policies to <br /> limit heights to three stories or less. Commissioner Allen discussed a battle in the City of <br /> Livermore over a higher-density project on its Main Street. Mr. Williams discussed the San <br /> Rafael Downtown Specific Plan. He stated too low density should not be developed in certain <br /> areas, such as townhomes in a business park. <br /> THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED <br /> There were no comments from the public. <br /> THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 of 10 September 8, 2021 <br />ity. Mr. Williams suggested a one or <br /> 1.25-acre site family development with 75-90 family dwelling units per acre. He discussed <br /> Commissioner Allen's mention of studios but explained that the housing shortage was based <br /> on family housing. He explained the State had changed its focus in the last two rounds of tax <br /> credits to require more family units, and he was seeing entitled projects with a larger number of <br /> studios were switching to include more larger, family units. <br /> Ms. Clark referenced a discussion with Mr. Williams regarding competitiveness for tax credits <br /> and geographic priorities. Mr. Williams stated geographic locations needed to have <br /> surrounding amenities and services and priority funding was provided for projects near transit <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 10 September 8, 2021 <br />standards to <br /> meet the State's requirements by developing objective design standards and procedures. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 10 September 8, 2021 <br />