My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01 ATTACHMENT 3
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2023
>
012623 SPECIAL
>
01 ATTACHMENT 3
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/20/2023 5:34:38 PM
Creation date
1/20/2023 5:34:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
1/26/2023
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Document Relationships
01
(Message)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2023\012623 SPECIAL
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
WORK SESSION AND DIRECTION <br />Staff requests input and direction from the Planning Commission and City Council <br />regarding these conceptual development scenarios, toward identifying a preferred <br />scenario between scattered and clustered housing allocation. The Planning <br />Commission and City Council could also opt to combine elements or to modify some of <br />the "common" elements of the scenarios (e.g., configuration of the open space, <br />inclusion of a hotel and/or grocery store). <br />The preferred conceptual scenario will be used to inform the Housing Element toward <br />assigning housing units among the parcels. To help facilitate the discussion among the <br />Planning Commission and City Council, staff is providing suggested discussion <br />questions below. <br />Discussion Question 1: Does the Planning Commission and the City Council agree with <br />potential uses being contemplated? <br />Discussion Question 2: Which overall concept reflected in the conceptual development <br />scenarios does the Planning Commission and the City Council <br />prefer? (The Planning Commission and City Council could also <br />opt to combine elements of the concepts (i.e., they are not <br />necessarily an "either/or"). <br />Discussion Question 3: Should the maximum number of units (total of 1,440) at the <br />mall be inclusive of the number of units a site may obtain by <br />utilizing the State Density Bonus, or should the units that could <br />be attained with a State Density Bonus be in addition to the <br />1,440 units? <br />Discussion Question 4: Does the Planning Commission and the City Council have any <br />feedback on the guiding principles, or "common <br />themes/elements" of the conceptual development scenarios, as <br />outlined in this report? <br />Discussion Question 5: Does the Planning Commission and the City Council have any <br />other feedback that it would like incorporated into a revised <br />conceptual scenario, with the intent that the revised housing <br />allocation would be reflected into the Housing Element planned <br />for adoption in January 2023? <br />Next Steps <br />At a minimum, the key Framework elements approved by City Council at the end of <br />January will determine the allocation of housing among the various sites, and the <br />density ranges at which that housing may be developed. It is also expected that guiding <br />principles and/or policies for development, along with major placemaking concepts (e.g., <br />circulation and open space elements) will be established. <br />Page 16 of 17
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.