My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2022
>
121522
>
01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/2/2023 4:10:07 PM
Creation date
12/9/2022 2:52:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
12/15/2022
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Document Relationships
01 ATTACHMENT 1
(Attachment)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2022\121522
01 SUPPLEMENTAL
(Attachment)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2022\121522
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
WORK SESSION AND DIRECTION <br /> Staff requests input and direction from the Planning Commission and City Council <br /> regarding these conceptual development scenarios, toward identifying a preferred <br /> scenario between scattered and clustered housing allocation. The Planning <br /> Commission and City Council could also opt to combine elements or to modify some of <br /> the "common" elements of the scenarios (e.g., configuration of the open space, <br /> inclusion of a hotel and/or grocery store). <br /> The preferred conceptual scenario will be used to inform the Housing Element toward <br /> assigning housing units among the parcels. To help facilitate the discussion among the <br /> Planning Commission and City Council, staff is providing suggested discussion <br /> questions below. <br /> Discussion Question 1: Does the Planning Commission and the City Council agree with <br /> potential uses being contemplated? <br /> Discussion Question 2: Which overall concept reflected in the conceptual development <br /> scenarios does the Planning Commission and the City Council <br /> prefer? (The Planning Commission and City Council could also <br /> opt to combine elements of the concepts (i.e., they are not <br /> necessarily an "either/or"). <br /> Discussion Question 3: Should the maximum number of units (total of 1,440) at the <br /> mall be inclusive of the number of units a site may obtain by <br /> utilizing the State Density Bonus, or should the units that could <br /> be attained with a State Density Bonus be in addition to the <br /> 1,440 units? <br /> Discussion Question 4: Does the Planning Commission and the City Council have any <br /> feedback on the guiding principles, or "common <br /> themes/elements" of the conceptual development scenarios, as <br /> outlined in this report? <br /> Discussion Question 5: Does the Planning Commission and the City Council have any <br /> other feedback that it would like incorporated into a revised <br /> conceptual scenario, with the intent that the revised housing <br /> allocation would be reflected into the Housing Element planned <br /> for adoption in January 2023? <br /> Next Steps <br /> At a minimum, the key Framework elements approved by City Council at the end of <br /> January will determine the allocation of housing among the various sites, and the <br /> density ranges at which that housing may be developed. It is also expected that guiding <br /> principles and/or policies for development, along with major placemaking concepts (e.g., <br /> circulation and open space elements) will be established. <br /> Page 16 of 17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.