PC 092221 - Laserfiche WebLink

Climate Action Plan (CAP) goals. She provided suggested modifications for accessory dwelling units to provide affordable housing. Becky Dennis provided public comment regarding partnering with corporations to integrate the Climate Action Plan with the Housing Element. Chair Brown acknowledged the public comments received, including the written public comments from Ms. Dennis. He inquired whether staff had any remarks related to the public comments. Ms. Clark responded that staff would provide the memo, provided to the Commission, to Ms. Dennis to help clarify the differences of the data regarding the proportion of employed residents who work in Pleasanton versus the number of jobs held by Pleasanton residents. Chair Brown inquired whether staff had had an opportunity to look through the written public comments received by Ms. Dennis, which annotated various sections of the draft Preliminary Report and included recommendations. Ms. Clark stated staff would review the written comments and make any adjustments to clarify or correct inaccuracies, or elaborate on the data to help tailor to the local conditions since the information provided in the draft Preliminary Report followed the format and content sent by the State. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Housing Needs Assessment— Are there any comments on the Housing Needs Assessment (Appendix A)? Commissioner Nibert referenced the draft Preliminary Report and asked about the reference to over 70 percent of Pleasanton housing stock being single-family, attached and detached, however multiple family housing of five or more units had experienced more growth in the last decade. He asked the measure of growth and future expectations. Ms. Clark explained that the shift came from the large number of multi-family housing development projects constructed following the last Housing Element Cycle and the pent-up demand for high density housing and housing development with a number of sites and developers ready to move forward following adoption of the Housing Element. The opportunity to construct several thousand units of new multi-family housing had an effect of the relative proportion of multi-family housing in the City. Commissioner Nibert inquired if the same demand currently existed, or would exist when the current Housing Element Cycle was approved. Ms. Clark stated she felt that was likely, because of the continued desire for people to live in Pleasanton; the level of interest from developers over the past several years; and the expressed interest she had seen in developing new sites for housing. The lack of new entitlements in the past several years may create a surge in new production following conclusion of the current cycle. Commissioner Allen agreed that a deeper dive into the data was necessary. She stated the report appeared to reflect the need for more 1- or 2-person households and 1- or 2-bedroom units versus larger, multi-bedroom units. She anticipated demand at all levels but suggested determining the greatest needs for Pleasanton. She stated Section A3.4 could use more depth to provide additional understanding. She requested additional data on the following: 1) a breakout of where people worked and where employees came from on Page Al 1, work/job balance; and 2) performance over the past 5-10 years on housing stock, including single-family projects like Lund Ranch, in Figure A19 on Page A23. Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 10 September 22, 2021 Commission Minutes Page 4 of 10 September 22, 2021