_Minutes_February 23, 2022 - Laserfiche WebLink

asked if it was likely that cars would block the intersection. Mr. Tassano stated he did not believe there would be a queuing impact for the school. Commissioner Nibert asked for information on the Ray Street project. Ms. Clark explained the in-lieu parking fee, which was not an option for the school project. Commissioner Nibert asked about the proposed noise mitigations. Mr. Luchini stated specifics had not been provided on the proposed physical activity locations. Commissioner Allen asked for clarification on the level of noise risk for the neighbors during break times. Mr. Luchini explained that no outdoor play area had been designated and breaks and recreational activities would occur inside the building. Commissioner Allen asked if a condition could be added to prohibit use of the outdoor courtyard area for breaks. Ms. Clark stated the applicant's narrative stated recess and physical education would occur in the common room, on church grounds or offsite and a condition could be added prohibiting use of the courtyard if the Commission so desired. Commissioner Brown expressed concern with parking and referenced the Pleasanton Municipal Code requiring onsite or adjoining site parking. He also expressed skepticism about compliance with use of offsite parking. He concurred with some of staff's proposed findings. Commissioner Morgan asked how many people attended church services on Sunday. Mr. Bryson stated 100 people between the two services. Commissioner Morgan stated he had some confidence that traffic from 10-25 students would not be a significant impact and he was leaning towards approval on a trial basis to evaluate parking and traffic. Commissioner Nibert concurred with staff's analysis and data related to the six required findings, therefore, he was leaning in favor of granting the conditional use permit. Commissioner Allen stated she was leaning toward denial because she did not concur with the findings for Items C and E. She disagreed with Commissioner Morgan's comments regarding limited impact from school traffic considering the residents purchased their homes aware of church traffic. She stated that on the narrow streets of Second and Neal, with people dropping off children and using driveways to turn around, she did not consider that "free flowing" traffic. She stated she was practically skeptical of the proposed offsite parking. Chair Pace asked if there was a way to allow a trial period. Ms. Harryman stated conditional use permits could not be approved on a test basis. She stated conditions could be modified or the permit revoked if there were issues. Chair Pace asked for additional information on permits returning to the Commission for reconsideration. Ms. Harryman stated issues were generally resolved without permits returning to the Commission. Commissioner Allen asked if a scaled back version could be approved to reduce risk, with reconsideration in six months. Ms. Harryman stated a condition of approval could be included which could later be expanded. Chair Pace suggested obtaining additional data through a trial period. Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 8 February 23, 2022 stated she would like to increase residential fees based on square footage or number of bedrooms and that tier pricing was critical. She suggested reconsidering the basis for the low-income housing study, especially for residential. She requested more data on the expenditure of funding and what percentage was directed at adding more housing versus the other programs, because HCD was looking at the number of built units. She stated it was worth exploring a housing overlay zone but the ordinance should align with State law for short term. Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 7 February 9, 2022 a business person would be equal with building a unit and paying an IZO. Ms. Clark explained the basis for the inclusionary zoning requirement, and the amount of the low-income housing fee were different and therefore, there was a disjuncture between the two fees (i.e. the in-lieu fee does not cover 100 % of the cost of constructing an affordable unit). Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 7 February 9, 2022