Laserfiche WebLink
Excerpt: Approved Planning Commission Minutes, September 8, 2021 Page 1 of 9 <br />P20-0989, City of Pleasanton, Objective Design Standards – Work session to review <br />draft changes to the Housing Site Development Standards and Design Guidelines, and <br />to review and discuss housing densities for residential development. <br />Chair Brown explained the discussion and presentation would be divided into two parts: <br />1)changes to the existing standards and guidelines for housing sites; and 2) projects of <br />density greater than 40 dwelling units per acre in other communities. <br />Senior Planner Shweta Bonn presented the specifics of the item in the Agenda Report <br />related to the first portion of the presentation on changes to the existing standards and <br />guidelines for housing sites. <br />Commissioner Gaidos inquired why the tiered standard stopped at 45 dwelling units per <br />acre (du/ac) and whether there was consideration of larger projects. Director of <br />Community Development Ellen Clark explained the Housing Standards and Guidelines <br />were established to reflect existing established densities, which are currently a <br />maximum of 40 dwelling units per acre. She stated there was an opportunity to consider <br />higher density projects as part of the Housing Element process, but focus for now was <br />on standards for existing sites and densities. <br />Commissioner Nibert questioned the group usable open space standard for 200 square <br />feet/unit for projects with density greater than 45 dwelling units per acre, indicating it <br />sounded less than what would be desirable. Ms. Clark responded it was an aggregate <br />for common open space and it was a smaller number per unit because of co-benefit for <br />combining the space with other more usable common open space for the project. She <br />explained the need for a careful balance to ensure potential projects would remain <br />feasible. Rick Williams, Van Meter Williams Pollack (VMWP) LLP, stated the numbers <br />were comparable to standards in similar other communities. He explained the ratio of <br />square footage and common open space. <br />Commissioner Nibert asked about the proposed step back for upper floors. Mr. <br />Williams explained the standard focused on visual impact of the top floor, which affected <br />the mass the most. Commissioner Nibert asked about the use of high-quality materials <br />on 20 percent of the frontage of the building and two percent overall and asked if the <br />two percent encompassed the <br />20 percent or if it was exclusive. Mr. Williams stated the two percent was included in <br />the <br />20 percent, in an effort to create a base for building by using those materials on the <br />lower portion of the building. <br />Chair Brown asked if the intention was to promote the ability for various levels of <br />housing and if more than two percent would make lower income housing infeasible. Mr. <br />Williams explained they conducted test cases and it was necessary to allow flexibility <br />while encouraging use of higher quality materials.