SR 06:065 - Laserfiche WebLink

. PUD-85-9 was approved in 1985 for a 132-unit retirement hotel complex on this site; this approval is still valid and a developer is considering building the project . The Planning Commission earlier considered and rejected the redesignation of this site as High Density Residential as part of the General Plan Update process. . MDR may be an appropriate designation for consideration. . Issues include noise, views of ridge from existing neighborhood, access, neighborhood compatibility, adjacency to park. Staff is seeking feedback on the appropriate land use designations and regulations for the sites discussed above. NEXT STEPS: In order to move forward to the next step in the process, namely a preliminary analysis of traffic impacts, economic and fiscal impacts, and impacts on other infrastructure such as schools, staff intends to prepare various land use options. These options would be reviewed and discussed by the Planning Commission and City Council, and would serve as a starting point for selecting a "preferred" land use plan and alternatives for review in the Environmental Impact Report. Staff believes these land use options should represent the widest range of potential options the City Council is willing to consider, since this will provide the most flexibility in selecting a "preferred plan". For each potential development site discussed, the options would show either the existing land use designation or a new future land use. The options would also show alternatives for the major city-wide land use issues that have been discussed. For example, each option would either include or exclude land with over 25 percent slope when calculating residential density in hill areas; and each option would recommend a number of residential units (between 200 and 500) to reserve for a future General Plan. It is staffs intent to develop these land use options around a general theme. For example, one may be a "Dispersed Residential Development" option, which would result in a mix oflower- density and higher-density housing, with new housing located where currently planned in the hill areas, as well as in East Pleasanton, and on scattered sites city-wide. Some amount of additional housing may also be located in Hacienda and adjacent to the new BART station. Variations on this alternative could have a smaller or larger reserve of residential units for a future General Plan build out, and mayor may not exclude land with over a 25 percent slope when calculating residential density. In contrast, another potential option, a "Focus on Mixed Use/Transit Oriented Development (TOD): Concentrated Residential" scenario would result in more higher-density housing located close to the existing and future BART stations, an emphasis on in-fill development, and perhaps the transfer of some residential density from large lots in the hills to these areas. SR 06:065 Page 11 of 12