21 - Laserfiche WebLink

Staff recommends including these sites for several reasons. Most of these sites have relatively good VMTs (Areas 29, 16, 7, 2, 14, 6, 5, 8, 9, 25, and 18) and scored well with the initial scoring criteria. Areas 29, 16, 19, 7, 14, 6, 8, 9, 25, 18, and 23 scored within the top two tiers. Many of the sites are located near infrastructure accommodating a variety of modes of transport (e.g., BART, ACE, bus stops, and/or bicycle facilities). The sites located in Hacienda are particularly proximate to a variety of infrastructure. Many are also proximate to services and amenities. All have expressed some form of owner interest and represent very feasible housing sites. Some sites (Areas 29, 7, 22, 1) have specific areas of the parcels that are either vacant or have a dedicated area identified for housing without the need to remove the existing uses, and other sites include vacant buildings. There was concern throughout the Housing Element Update process about loss of service commercial uses. Staff aimed to remove the majority of these sites, acknowledging limited relocation opportunities in town. Lastly, this mix of sites is relatively well distributed throughout the city and will not create Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing issues which can result if all of the housing is concentrated in one area. Collectively, these sites have more compelling factors than the sites recommended for removal. Below, staff highlights some of the sites recommended for inclusion and provides greater detail about each Area: • Area 25 PUSD District: This site was ranked in the top tier of the initial scoring criteria, has relatively good VMTs, and does not negatively contribute to LOS deterioration or congestion. There is strong expressed owner interest, and it is a highly feasible housing site with PUSD having recently acquired a new property to house the district offices, making it no longer essential for this use. Its location proximate to services and amenities represents a good location for housing. However, there have been several public comments and concerns related to its inclusion in the Housing Element. Some of the concerns have centered around the compatibility to neighboring residential neighborhoods. The adjacent residential includes predominately single-family lots, and the density proposed on this site ranges from 8-16 dwelling units per acre. Development would likely be small lot single-family, townhomes, or low-rise multi -family units (such as garden apartments). There may also be an opportunity to work with PUSD to develop at least some of the units here as teacher or PUSD employee housing, which could help the District attract and retain top -tier teaching staff who may otherwise be priced out of the Pleasanton housing market. • Area 18 Vallev Plaza- This site was ranked in the top tier of the initial scoring criteria, has relatively good VMT, and does not negatively contribute to LOS deterioration or congestion. There is a strongly expressed -owner interest in this site, though HCD did have some questions related to redevelopment feasibility, which can likely be overcome based on owner interest. There have been several concerns related to its inclusion in the Housing Element. Many of the comments focused on removal of neighborhood commercial uses and compatibility to neighboring residential neighborhoods. This site currently contains several Page 17 of 21