Laserfiche WebLink
The proposed amendments to the document also include only guidelines and strategies <br />to ensure new development is compatible with the existing neighborhood. These <br />strategies include: providing setbacks to match adjacent properties; provide enhanced <br />landscaping; providing an increased setback for floor(s) above the lower adjacent <br />residential development; and locating taller building in the center of the site or at arterial <br />intersections, allowing less tall aspects of the project to be located adjacent to existing <br />residential development. <br />Part 5 (Appendices) <br />Whereas the appendices in the 2012 Housing DG referred to an excerpt from the PMC <br />regarding usable open space and a site-by-site summary of the nine housing sites, the <br />proposed appendices would delete the PMC excerpt but still include the site-specific housing <br />site summaries, along with a summary of various building types (previously located in Part 3 of <br />the document), and a glossary of terms used in the document. <br />Density Greater Than 30 units/acre <br />During the Design Training and in introductory meetings concerning the objective design <br />standards, the Planning Commission expressed interest in receiving more information about <br />projects that had density at or greater than 30 units per acre to help inform future discussions <br />about appropriate densities for sites in the ffh Cycle Housing Element Update. <br />Existing Projects in Pleasanton <br />One example of a project over 30 units/acre in Pleasanton is the Vintage Apartments. In this <br />project, although the average density across the project site is 30 units per acre, actual density <br />in different subareas of the site varies, being at about 40 units per acre at the southeast corner <br />of the site where the podium building is located. Increasing the mass and density of this portion <br />of the site allowed the units along Bernal Avenue to be lower-density, two-story structures. <br />Other sites that were rezoned as part of the 2012 Housing Element were identified for greater <br />density than 30 units per acre (e.g., the site at Stoneridge Mall was rezoned at a density of 40 <br />units per acre and the California Center site was rezoned at a density range of 35 to 40 units <br />per acre). Although a project was approved at California Center, and another is proposed at <br />Stoneridge Mall, neither of these projects have yet been constructed. <br />As the example of the Vintage Apartments demonstrates, building density and project density <br />may be different. Generally, building densities at or above 40 dwelling units per acre require <br />some form of structured parking. Conversely, the cost of structured parking makes podium <br />buildings uneconomical at densities less than 40 units per acre. Podium buildings (such as the <br />building at the southeast corner of Vintage Apartments) are often seen as desirable, because <br />this typology provides courtyards, increased open space, and better resident amenities than <br />can be achieved with typical surface-parked designs. <br />With the exception of Irby Ranch and Vintage Apartments, developers that proposed projects <br />on sites from the 2012 Housing Element generally proposed buildings that were uniformly <br />designed to the required site density. Since the site rezoned for the 2012 Housing Element <br />ranged from 30 to 35 units per acre, this development pattern generally resulted in <br />homogenous surface-parked projects and incentivized applicants to build to the lower end of <br />allowed densities to reduce their construction cost. <br />P20-0989, Objective Design Standards Planning Commission <br />12 of 14