3 - Laserfiche WebLink

Draft Housing Element December 14, 2022 14 of 21 • Area 1 Lester: Concerns related to development in the hills; • Area 2: Stoneridge Shopping Center: Concerns with added congestion to an already busy area; • Area 11 Old Santa Rita: Concern due to loss of space for small, service commercial, and light industrial businesses (e.g., automotive repair); • Area 16 Tri Valley Inn: Concern with compatibility (e.g., density and height) with adjacent neighborhoods and traffic; • Area 18 Valley Plaza: Concern with the removal of valuable neighborhood commercial uses and community services, and compatibility (e.g., density and height) with adjacent neighborhoods; • Area 21 Kiewit: Concern with increased GHG emissions; • Area 23 Sunol: Concern due to the large number of units proposed and potential traffic issues; • Area 25 PUSD District: Concerns related to traffic, proximity to historic downtown, and changes to character, density, and crime in surrounding area, among other concerns; and • Area 26 St. Augustine: Concerns with increased density and compatibility with neighborhood. In addition to concerns noted above, staff has received general inquiries and comments related to several other sites (e.g., related to feasibility, leases, environmental remediation, etc.). Recommendation The existing site list includes a surplus of units and throughout the process it has been understood that the site list be reduced to a unit count that more accurately reflects Pleasanton’s RHNA. Due to “no net loss” provisions of state law1, staff recommends a modest four to 10-percent buffer above the City’s RHNA be maintained. Additionally, it is worth highlighting that low and medium density sites have an assumed capacity derived from the average density range suggested for the site. For example, if a site has a minimum capacity of 15 units and maximum capacity of 25 units, the assumed capacity is 20 units. High density sites assume the minimum capacity. This approach represents the most realistic assumed capacity and one that will be accepted by HCD. It also provides an additional buffer for no net loss, in the event some sites are developed below the assumed capacity. There are several combinations of the potential rezone site list that would achieve the required RHNA unit count and all sites on the potential list are suitable and could accommodate residential development. Below in Table 2, staff ranks the potential rezone sites. Sites with white backgrounds (i.e., not “grayed out”), are recommended for inclusion in the 6th Cycle Housing Element. This ranking, while grounded in the 1 “No net loss” provisions are a component of the Housing Accountability Act, which, whenever a project is approved with few units, or less affordability than cited in the Housing Element, requires findings to be made that adequate zoning capacity remains in the inventory to accommodate the units not built, or for the City to rezone additional sites to accommodate that number of units.