_Minutes_2022-12-14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 8 December 14, 2022 Chair Pace discussed HCD’s questions about site selection and whether the City’s assumptions were accurate. Ms. Campbell stated the site-specific comments were predominantly related to the feasibility of redeveloping the sites. Commissioner Nibert referenced a comment regarding development of sites over 10-acres and inference that no one reasonably expected lower income housing would be met with those sites. He asked why the City could not say it had the will to make it happen. Ms. Clark discussed programs included in the plan to overcome challenges of developing larger sites and that staff felt sites were feasible, developable and issues could be overcome with City and owner support. She stated the State required additional efforts to show development as feasible. Ms. Campbell pointed out that Program 1.7 was expanded to bolster the programs around those sites. Speaker cards were submitted, and comments received from the following members of the public: Guy Houston, representing Valley Plaza, indicated support for mixed-use development of the property and presented the draft plan incorporating existing commercial with housing around the periphery. He urged the Planning Commission to support staff’s recommendation. In response to Commission questions, Mr. Houston anticipated 162 units would be developed; and clarified the remaining retail and location of proposed housing. Jason Quintel, representing the Kiewit site, summarized their proposed affordable housing development, including junior ADUs, parks and open space, surrounding infrastructure and retaining neighborhood characteristics. He expressed concern with lack of land use designations; PUD conformance review and inclusionary zoning ordinance and objective standards. Chuck Davis, Senior Vice President for Simon, discussed his efforts to work with the City for opportunities for mixed-use development. He summarized the proposed development of 18-acres for housing. He expressed concern with removal of studied sites due to reducing the buffer. Patrick Costanzo, representing the Merit Property, discussed their current proposal for 111, age- qualified homes, with 22 affordable units, and indicated support for staff’s recommendation. RECESS Chair Pace called a recess at 9:11 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:17 p.m. with all Commissioners present. Commissioner Morgan stated he felt the plan rezoned more land than required due to conservative assumptions, which would nudge Pleasanton towards being more of a bedroom community. He stated it was necessary to make a conscious decision whether to submit a conservative plan or realistic plan. He suggested submitting a plan with what would really happen and using average capacity for the high-density sites and removing the buffer for market rate housing. He further recommended removing Valley Plaza; adding Boulder Court back into the plan; considering Pimlico North; increasing density at Tri-Valley, Black Avenue and St. Elizabeth to be the maximum densities studied in the EIR; and removing Sunol Blvd. In response to Chair Pace, Ms. Murillo discussed consideration of the City’s track record to justify densities. She explained efforts to use safe harbor approaches accepted by HCD and trends within the City so that there were realistic capacities that could be defended and certified. Chair Pace asked the consequence of HCD disagreeing with use of mid-point assumptions. Ms. Clark explained that HCD could require additional information and/or reject the plan. Ms. Campbell added that if density ranges were changed, the minimum should be used. In response to Chair Pace, Ms. Clark stated the City had a compliant (5th Cycle) housing element until the end of January. David Bergman, consultant, clarified