Laserfiche WebLink
Jack Hovingh, 4250 Muirwood Drive, was opposed to this project <br />because he felt it was a good site for high density residential. <br />Residential units are needed with the businesses that are coming <br />into Pleasanton. <br />Judy Mayhew, 5548 San Jose Drive, one of the homeowners in the <br />area area concurred with the comments of Mr. Hovingh. No more <br />commercial development is needed in the area. The Axiom group <br />hasn't developed their approved project yet on First Street, <br />Mission Plaza is just getting off of the ground. She reviewed <br />similar circumstances in Danville where existing businesses had <br />to close because of this type of situation. <br />Tom Fox, 310 Main Street, spoke in favor of the project and felt <br />it was well planned and would enhance downtown. <br />The public hearing was closed. <br />Commissioner Wilson really had concerns with shifting high <br />density residential property to commercial. Commissioner Innes <br />asked the staff if they have heard from the State regarding the <br />Housing Element. Mr. Harris stated that staff heard from the <br />State. They talked about achieving the fairshare allocation and <br />providing housing for various income ranges. Fairshare is what <br />every City is supposed to achieve in low income and affordable <br />housing. Commissioner Wilson asked if this is is something we <br />should respond to. Mr. Harris stated yes and it will probably be <br />done as part of the overall general plan review. Mr. Harris then <br />explained the population benchmarks. <br />Commissioner Getty stated that there is no reason not to approve <br />the project for the site if they can't get sewer or growth <br />management approval. Commissioner Innes felt that this property <br />is a prime area for high density housing. He acknowledged that <br />it appears to be a very nice commercial development but the City <br />needs housing. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Lindsey, seconded by <br />Commissioner Wilson that the negative declaration prepared for <br />cases GP-84-10 and PUD-84-8 be recommended for approval inasmuch <br />as project approval would have an insignificant effect on the <br />environment. <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br />AYES: <br />NOES: <br />ABSENT: <br />ABSTAIN: <br />Resolution No. <br />of the negative <br />motioned. <br />Commissioners Getty, Innes, Lindsey, <br />Wilson and Chairman Doherty <br />None <br />None <br />None <br />2521 was entered and adopted recommending approval <br />declaration for cases GP-84-10 and PUD-84-8 as <br />- 13 - <br />_... <br />