Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner Allen moved to approve the Consent Calendar. <br /> Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. <br /> ROLL CALL VOTE: <br /> AYES: Commissioners Allen, Brown, Gaidos, Nibert, and Pace <br /> NOES: None <br /> ABSENT: None <br /> ABSTAIN: None <br /> The Actions of the Zoning Administrator were approved, as submitted. <br /> The meeting minutes of January 12, 2022 were approved as submitted. <br /> The meeting minutes of January 26, 2022 were approved as submitted. <br /> Resolution PC-2022-05 approving P21-1206 was approved, as motioned. <br /> MEETING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC <br /> 5. Public Comment from the audience regarding items not listed on the agenda — <br /> Speakers are encouraged to limit comments to 3 minutes. <br /> There were no speaker cards submitted. <br /> PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS <br /> 6. P21-07151P22-0126, Lighthouse Baptist School, 118 Neal Street - Applications for: 1) a <br /> Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to operate a private school; and 2) a Variance/Parking <br /> Variance to allow all required on-site parking to be located at an off-site location not adjoining <br /> the subject site as required by Pleasanton Municipal Code (PMC) Section 18.88.050.A. <br /> Zoning is RM-4 (Multi-Family Residential) District. <br /> Commissioner Gaidos recused himself due to the proximity of his residence to the project and <br /> left the meeting. <br /> Mr. Luchini presented the specifics on the item in the Agenda Report. <br /> Commissioner Brown asked if all six findings needed to be made to approve the parking <br /> variance. Ms. Clark confirmed that all six findings needed to be made. Ms. Harryman clarified <br /> that other findings or conditions to the proposed findings could be made, but all six needed to <br /> be made in some way. <br /> Commissioner Morgan asked where the teachers would park. Mr. Luchini stated teachers would <br /> be required to park in the offsite parking. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 8 February 23, 2022 <br />e, Task Force, etc.) <br /> There were no reports from meetings attended. <br /> 6. Actions of the City Council <br /> Ms. Clark provided a brief overview of the items listed in the report. <br /> 7. Future Planning Calendar <br /> Ms. Clark gave a brief overview of future items for the Commission's review. <br /> MATTERS INITIATED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS <br /> Commissioner Allen requested an update on the value capture project approved by the Council. <br /> Ms. Clark stated progress had not yet been made but it remained on the list and staff was <br /> consulting with an expert. <br /> Chair Pace thanked Ms. Hagen for her hard work for the City. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 7 February 9, 2022 <br /> the percentage of affordable units required between <br /> multifamily and single-family to 20% and to clearly identify affordability levels. She stated she <br /> agreed with the first two recommendations on LIHF but would like to substantially raise the fees <br /> for non-residential very close to the maximum, because Pleasanton was an attractive place for <br /> businesses and the fees would not be a deterrent and the rate should provide the necessary <br /> units for the employees. She stated she would like to increase residential fees based on square <br /> footage or number of bedrooms and that tier pricing was critical. She suggested reconsidering <br /> the basis for the low-income housing study, especially for residential. She requested more data <br /> on the expenditure of funding and what percentage was directed at adding more housing versus <br /> the other programs, because HCD was looking at the number of built units. She stated it was <br /> worth exploring a housing overlay zone but the ordinance should align with State law for short <br /> term. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 7 February 9, 2022 <br />a business person would be equal with building a unit and paying an IZO. <br /> Ms. Clark explained the basis for the inclusionary zoning requirement, and the amount of the <br /> low-income housing fee were different and therefore, there was a disjuncture between the two <br /> fees (i.e. the in-lieu fee does not cover 100 % of the cost of constructing an affordable unit). <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 7 February 9, 2022 <br />