SUPPLEMENTAL - Laserfiche WebLink

Pleasanton City Council BRAUN + (P A RAUNMARTELILP January 18, 2023 Page 10 City Council and Planning Commission would use every tool available to stop them.1° There is no reference to owner interest in building housing here, even though the commercial zoning district might in theory permit residential uses. Nor is there any realistic expectation that the narrower portion at the back of the parcel—another mid-block right of way through to Railroad Avenue—could realistically provide the claimed 25 units/acre. Absent evidence and a proper finding by the City Council that the existing use is likely to discontinue during the next eight years,the site is not appropriately listed as accommodating 18 units of lower income housing. 8. Pimlico Area (Hertz and Avis)(APN 946-1101-31-2, -35-02, and -36-04) Prior to the Planning Commission meeting on January 12, 2023,these three parcels between Pimlico Drive and Highway 580 had been removed from the inventory as lacking sufficient evidence that it would realistically develop during the next eight years. But after a Planning Commissioner claimed at the January 2023 Planning Commission meeting to have talked to two out of the three owners, and said they were interested in potential redevelopment (though he didn't identify what they said,or most importantly,when they would consider building something),the Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City Council re- include this site on the inventory, subject to further work by the staff. Because of the compressed timeframe and the last-minute re-addition, it isn't clear whether this site will or won't be included in the inventory, or what evidence exists to show that it likely to develop. Given the approach about other sites, however, we note the following. First, there are three owners, and the City should not include all three parcels unless each of them express interest in redeveloping during the next eight years in writing. See HCD Site Inventory Guidebook(identifying HCD's interpretation of"substantial evidence"). Second,there are existing tenants, including Hertz and Avis. There may be long-term leases that will maintain their existing uses sufficiently into the housing cycle to preclude redevelopment during the next eight years. Absent a finding based on substantial evidence that the existing uses are likely to discontinue—and currently,the draft contains nothing, because this site had been dropped off entirely—this site is not appropriately counted as accommodating lower income housing. 9. Valley Plaza(APNs 946-3295-6, -7, -9, -10, -11, -12, -13, and -3295-2-2). The Valley Plaza site(area 18) is a 7.81-acre commercial center with multiple buildings and associated surface parking on seven parcels. Some of the owners are interested in high density residential development of a portion of the site, but unfortunately has run into substantial resistance from the community,the Planning Commission, and members of the City Council, and so have scaled back their plans. As of the January 3, 2023 draft,the site was counted as meeting 166 units of the RHNA need: 90 lower income, 55 moderate, and 21 above moderate. 10 If the City Council doubts this, it is urged to consider the reaction to building residential housing on the considerably less picturesque Valley Plaza, discussed further below.