Laserfiche WebLink
Regards, <br />Ellen Holmgren, Administrative Assistant <br />City of Pleasanton <br />From: Ellen Clark <br />report for 10/19 <br />From: Derek Sagehom <br />Sent: Monday, October1 ,2 21 2:49 P <br />To: Ellen Clark <br />Cc: HousingElements q�c ca.�ov <br />Subject: Pleasanton Draft f F, report for 10/19 <br />Hello, <br />The draft report identifies three governmental restraints: 1) reliance on PUDs, 2) subjective <br />design requirements and 3) routine updates to density bonus and other state laws. <br />#1 is a real constraint, but Lisa Wise Consultants makes no recommendation for shifts to <br />zoning codes changes that would permit even Mullin Densities of 30 dwelling units per acre_ <br />The existing high density general plan zone caps out at 15 DUs per acre. The appeal of the <br />PUD process would be useful if Pleasanton had a track record of approving many PUD <br />developments with high percentages of BMR units, which it does not. <br />#2 misstates the law. The Housing Accountability Act, which is permanent, prohibits denials <br />based solely on subjective design criteria. SB330, prohibits enforcement of subjective design <br />criteria on housing generally and was just extended by signature of SB8 in September 2021 <br />to 2030. This represents seven of the eight years of the 6th Cycle planning period. While it is <br />