SR 05:258 - Laserfiche WebLink

Patricia Adkins, 320 St. Mary Street, stated that she was a 22-year resident and business owner in Pleasanton, a block from the proposed project. She noted that there has been an increase in the number of restaurants in this part of the Downtown and that parking has consequently become a problem during lunch and dinner times. She commented that projects are being allowed in the Downtown with no consideration for parking and that each project should be allowed to stand on its own without relying on in-lieu parking because it does not help the Downtown. She gave the Rose Hotel as an example of a business that provided for its own parking needs by constructing parking underground. With respect to the proposed project, she indicated that she was not opposed to the number of units but to the design, commenting that the units were unattractive, looked like low-cost government housing, and did not fit in Downtown Pleasanton. Mr. Haller responded to Mr. Byrd's comments, indicating that the PDA was part of whole process and that the applicant spent four to five months revising the streetscape and house features as well as agreeing with the $28,000 in-lieu parking fee proposed by PDA. He added that Messrs. Peter MacDonald and Michael O'Callaghan of the PDA Board are pleased with the project bringing six new families into town. He then clarified that Mr. Winter is looking to build conservatively to fill the housing gap under $700,000. He clarified that the original proposal was to sell the units for about $500,000, but he did not know if that was still feasible because the cost per square foot for construction had radically increased in the last 12 to 18 months that the project had been in processing. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Planning Commission recessed for a break at II :50 p.m. Acting Chairperson Arkin reconvened the meeting at II :55 p.m. Commissioner Roberts stated that design quality cannot be sacrificed for affordability and that affordability by design is entry-level and has to be attached housing. She provided examples of appropriate housing for the site such as Cambridge on the East coast. She expressed her appreciation for the applicant's goal to provide housing in Pleasanton for young couples but pointed out that it cannot always be done. She agreed that parking is a problem and that the project would take away parking spaces. She noted that the Oxsen and Barone homes are quality houses and that she did not get the streetscape comparison that she had requested of the peer review. She proposed that the project be redesigned and possibly provide underground parking or have the garages come off of St. John Street. She stated that the project would be good for another part of the City but not in the Downtown. She indicated that she could not support the project. Commissioner Pearce stated that infill housing and affordable housing are good goals. She expressed concern about density and commented that a streetscape comparison would have been helpful to see the line-up of all the houses. __ u___ - ------ ..----- -_..---- PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 27, 2005 Page 27 of31