12 ATTACHMENTS 1-2 - Laserfiche WebLink

Stoneridge Shopping Center (Site #22) scored just below the top tier of sites, with 22 points. Its lower score was principally because it lacks close access to grocery stores, parks and schools). Stoneridge ranked similarly with some of the sites proposed on existing light -industrial parcels such as Site #20: Boulder Court, and Site #11: Old Santa Rita Area, as well as with Site #21: Kiewitt. The lowest -ranked sites, based on the scoring criteria, were those in the most peripheral areas, including Site #22: Merritt, and Site #1: Lester, which scored 14 and 15 points respectively. However, some infill sites also scored relatively poorly, including the two sites on Pimlico (Sites #12 and #13), and Site #4: Owens Area, each of which scored less than 20 points. High Density Housing Sites. Scores and Ranking Among the high-density sites, the highest (tied) scores were for Site #26: Hacienda Terrace and Site #18: Valley Plaza, with other sites ranked/scored as noted above. The lowest ranked site (Site #12: Pimlico North) scored 17 points. Low- and Medium -Density Sites. Scores and Ranking Six sites were top-ranked with 26 points, including Site #3: PUSD-Donlon, Site #15: Rheem Drive, Site #16: Tri -Valley Inn, Site #19: Black Avenue, Site #24: Sonoma Drive Area, and Site #25: PUSD-District. Again, Lester and Merritt scored the lowest, along with the PUSD-Vineyard site. Summary As can be seen from the rankings, there is not a particularly clear geographic pattern to the ranking, and sites in all quadrants of the city scored relatively well — this is helpful in the goal to select sites that reflect a relatively even distribution throughout Pleasanton. In terms of which sites scored relatively better or worse, sites in more central portions of the City (which tend to be more conveniently located to community amenities and services), generally scored more highly, as did sites in Hacienda, which benefit from transit proximity and some strategically located commercial centers. The lowest -scoring sites were greenfield sites on the edges of the city, although, somewhat surprisingly, some infill locations (like the Pimlico and Owens Drive sites) did relatively poorly. Other Considerations In addition to the preliminary ranking and scoring, staff also evaluated the sites relative to a number of other more qualitative considerations relative to site suitability, including the overall likelihood of the site(s) getting developed based on site characteristics and owner interest, overall suitability for housing including compatibility with their surrounding neighborhoods; consistency with some of the community preferences for the types of sites and locations to be considered, as expressed in the community survey; and the geographic location and distribution of sites throughout the city. These considerations have helped to guide some initial recommendations, outlined below. Initial Recommendations for Sites List While the ranking is a helpful starting point and guide to sites which are likely to offer the best transit access, and access to services, other factors and policy considerations will come into play in the site selection process, and which could re -rank or raise in preference some sites over others based on the scores they received. Examples of sites that staff suggests might be Housing Element Update Planning Commission 14 of 19