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
Retention of Mall Core: In each of the conceptual scenarios, the mall "core" remains <br /> without significant modification to square footage, although in some instances existing <br /> vacant retail buildings such as the former Sears and Nordstrom stores could be <br /> demolished and replaced with other uses. <br /> Retention of Existing Sites Zoned for Housing: In each of the conceptual scenarios, the <br /> properties2 already designated for housing during the 4th Cycle Housing Element are not <br /> "counted" toward the 900-1,440 units, since these sites have already been zoned for <br /> housing and the units allocated in a prior Housing Element cycle. <br /> Reduced Commercial Parking Ratio: Each conceptual scenario presumes vehicular <br /> parking at a ratio of 3 spaces per 1,000 square feet of commercial square footage. This <br /> is a modified standard compared to the existing ratio of approximately 5 spaces per <br /> 1,000 square feet, but is consistent with the Pleasanton Municipal Code (PMC) <br /> minimum parking ratio for retail and office uses. While this change would require <br /> concurrence on behalf of all owners and modification to private agreements, general <br /> consensus among the owners has been to reduce the amount of surface parking <br /> contained on the site. The mall owner has emphasized the need for "pools" of <br /> convenient customer parking to be provided around the mall, potentially in smaller <br /> surface parking lots. <br /> Parking for New Residential and other Development: Adequate parking for housing <br /> developments could be provided by each project, either as garage structured parking in <br /> a "wrap" configuration, or in podium-style apartment buildings. <br /> Circulation Network:As illustrated, the primary vehicular circulation around the mall <br /> could remain on Stoneridge Mall Road. However, additional points of access to the mall <br /> core and between new development areas are suggested as shown on the diagrams for <br /> the scenarios, with the objective of facilitating vehicular and pedestrian connection <br /> around the mall. A multi-use perimeter path could be constructed along the inner side of <br /> Stoneridge Mall Road (i.e., adjacent to the mall properties) and pedestrian walkways <br /> could be provided throughout the site to allow access to the shops and connect <br /> between various portions of the site and Stoneridge Mall Road. Prominent, high-quality <br /> connections consisting of well-lit stairs and ramps at significant grade changes at <br /> locations where major department stores remain (which occur near both Macy's stores <br /> and near JC Penney) could be constructed to facilitate and encourage pedestrian <br /> access. A direct promenade path from the mall to BART and the Workday campus is <br /> provided in the scenarios. <br /> 2 The properties include an approximately 8-acre site and another approximately 2-acre site, both owned <br /> by Simon. Since the "base density" of the project is 40 du/ac and a total of 10 acres was zoned for <br /> housing, Simon has an allocation of up to 400 units, without a Density Bonus. A 6-acre portion of the <br /> larger site currently has a pending development application to construct a 360-unit housing project. The <br /> applicant is proposing a Density Bonus such that the project would have a density of 60 units to the acre <br /> (40 du/ac plus a 20 du/ac density bonus). The proposed project"uses" 240 of the of 400 total units, <br /> meaning that Simon could redistribute the remaining 160 units elsewhere on property that is currently (or <br /> will be in the future)zoned for housing. <br /> Page 7 of 17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.