Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City of Pleasant on, CA - City Council <br /> <br />Page 2 of 12 <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky confirmed that this meeting was only for discussion of street widening <br />options and any questions should be limited to that. Other hearings will deal with different <br />circulation elements. <br /> <br />In response to an inquiry from Ms. Fox, Mr. Swift clarified it was important for the public to <br />comment at all the planned meetings and at the end of each meeting, they can ask questions <br />or talk about the information presented at that meeting. <br /> <br />Ms. Hosterman envisioned this and the next workshop as information gathering and after <br />that the usual format for public comment would be followed. <br /> <br />Mr. Arkin asked if the goal of these meetings was to create an internally consistent General <br />Plan? <br /> <br />Mr. Swift said that was correct. <br /> <br />Mr. Arkin indicated he had questions and concerns about the traffic model and how <br />projections are made, as well as their accuracy. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift began to present the staff report. <br /> <br />Ms. Roberts asked what commercial occupancy rate was used in the build out projections? <br /> <br />Mr. Swift responded it was 93%, which included the South Bay development, as well as any <br />property estimated to be built under the General Plan, with the exception of those covered <br />by a Specific Plan, such as the Staples Ranch. <br /> <br />She indicated there was confusion about the number of residential units left to develop. Mr. <br />Iserson said there were 1700 units left and the staff report says there are 2611. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift explained that a traffic model considers various land units together. There are a <br />number of locations in the city where assisted living facilities are planned. The traffic model <br />considers assisted living and independent senior living facilities, as one category in the <br />model so there is the same trip rate. He further explained how housing units are calculated. <br /> <br />Mr. Iserson commented that he believed Ms. Belding was referring to the 29,000 units in the <br />housing cap, whereas the numbers in the staff report refer to the number of units reached in <br />the General Plan build out. That would be less than the housing cap. <br /> <br />Mr. Sullivan asked if the 27,300 units figure was pursuant to the General Plan build out? <br /> <br />Mr. Swift said it would be 27,315 units. <br /> <br />Mr. Arkin asked if Table I build out assumptions included the extension of West Las <br />Positas and Stoneridge? <br /> <br />Mr. Swift said it included everything in the General Plan Circulation Element, including <br />West Las Positas and Stoneridge. <br /> <br />http://www.ci.pleasanton.ca.us/archive/ccwsminutes050 111.html <br /> <br />8/22/2006 <br />