My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
4_Exhibit B
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2020 - PRESENT
>
2023
>
01-11
>
4_Exhibit B
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/5/2023 4:11:46 PM
Creation date
1/5/2023 4:08:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
1/11/2023
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Document Relationships
4
(Message)
Path:
\BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\AGENDA PACKETS\2020 - PRESENT\2023\01-11
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
562
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
983 Osos Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 | (805) 595 1345 | lisawiseconsulting.com | 4 <br />Breakout Rooms <br />Three virtual breakout rooms were facilitated, which allowed approximately seven attendees in each room, <br />along with City and LWC facilitators and notetakers. Miro, an online collaborative visualization software, <br />was used to encourage discussion, pose the same questions across all breakout rooms, and conduct <br />notetaking that was visible to breakout room participants. Three questions were asked to prompt <br />conversation: <br />1.What are the main housing challenges in Pleasanton? <br />2.What groups are most impacted by housing challenges and what types of housing would be most <br />appropriate to best serve them? <br />3.What kinds of tools and strategies would you like for Pleasanton to consider supporting and <br />facilitate housing? <br />Each breakout room had one Miro board for each question. City and LWC notetakers posted comments via <br />sticky notes to each Miro board. Certain pre-scripted sticky notes based on comments already received by <br />the City were provided to facilitate discussion. A summary of these discussions is below (Miro boards are <br />attached as Exhibit B). <br />Question 1: What are the main housing challenges in Pleasanton? <br />The following is a summary of input prompted by the first breakout room question: <br />A.Lack of housing choices especially for a variety of income levels (e.g., a lack of variety in unit size, <br />building size, housing types, supportive housing, and housing tenure). <br />B.Limited housing choices is resulting in high housing costs and limited opportunities for upward <br />mobility (e.g., rental costs are so high that it limits someone’s ability to save enough money to buy <br />a home in Pleasanton). People are moving to neighboring cities because housing is too expensive <br />in Pleasanton. <br />C.Not enough inventory for those making 120% Area Median Income (AMI). <br />D.High homeowners association fees are a challenge. <br />E.Below market deed restrictions used to be a solution but the cap on deed restricted resale prices <br />is an issue. <br />F. There is limited developable land to provide housing. Pleasanton is largely built out compared to <br />neighboring communities, and the limited land that is available is not designated for housing. <br />G.Lack of affordable housing within Pleasanton, especially in transit-oriented development (TOD) <br />opportunity areas (e.g., BART) where parking requirements can be relaxed for development. <br />H.The City’s policy preference for commercial development over residential development has <br />resulted in a shortage of affordable housing. <br />I.Regulatory hurdles like lengthy permitting processes, high parking standards, and the uncertainty <br />in the process of getting entitlements approved are challenges to affordable housing. <br />J.There is general community opposition to high density development. Maintaining “community <br />character” was cited multiple times as the reasoning for this opposition. <br />K.Lack of a jobs-housing balance in Pleasanton. Directly related to this, participants also indicated <br />traffic concerns especially related to the growth of Pleasanton. <br />L.Teachers were noted as a specific disadvantaged group that needs special attention. City should <br />have programs or incentives to encourage teachers to live in Pleasanton. Good schools were the <br />reason for some participants moving to Pleasanton and the lack of housing for teachers is <br />concerning. <br />M.Climate change and California’s current drought is an added challenge to addressing housing. <br />Public Participation Summaries City of Pleasanton | E-5
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.