Laserfiche WebLink
ROLL CALL VOTE <br />Ayes: Commissioners Getty, Jamieson and Chairman Doherty <br />Noes: None <br />Absent: Commissioners Leppert and Wilson <br />Resolution No. 1762 was then entered and adopted recommending to the City <br />Council that the 16 acre parcel (including Johnson and Dunkley properties) <br />be changed on the General Plan to Low Density. <br />REVIEW OF AND REVISIONS TO THE RESIDENTIAL ALLOCATION PROGRAM (RAP) <br />Mr. Harris made some introductory remarks concerning this topic. <br />Brian Swift summarized the report. He stated some of the items brought <br />up at other meetings were policy changes and should be considered when <br />the Housing Element is changed. <br />Commissioner Getty stated she had a problem with the staff recommendation <br />of eliminating bike paths; would like to see an incentive added to that <br />category so that bike paths would be encouraged. Chairman Doherty stated <br />that school buses may be eliminated in some areas such as on Santa Rita <br />Road and feels bike paths are also necessary. Commissioner Jamieson <br />stated there seemed to be an inconsistency because the staff is dis- <br />couraging the exemption of 20,000+ sq. ft. lots. Mr. Swift responded to <br />this. He stated that Page 3 shows things that can be done and were not <br />necessarily a staff recommendation. Commissioner Jamieson stated that <br />multiples should be encouraged and perhaps some exemptions might be con- <br />sidered for them. Mr. Swift stated that the staff feels major policy <br />decisions on housing should await consideration of the revised Housing <br />Element. Chairman Doherty stated he felt 50 units should be allowed to the <br />developers whether a project was phased or not. He further stated he <br />strongly feels that lots of 20,000 sq. ft. or more should be exempt from RAP. <br />Commissioner Getty asked Brian Swift to explain in-filling. Mr. Swift <br />explained. Commissioner Getty stated she didn't feel the small developers <br />would be helped with in-filling as defined in RAP and that it might hurt <br />the small developers. Commissioner Jamieson supported this statement. <br />Mr. Harris stated that vacant properties can cost the City money. <br />The public hearing was opened. <br />Ted Fairfield, Engineer, Pleasanton spoke. He did not concur with Mr. <br />Harris' statement that in-filling is less expensive for the City. He <br />stated he didn't concur with #1 on Page 19 of the report. Concerning <br />#7 he stated there should be more assurance in the phasing. He addressed <br />items #8 and 9 and stated he supports #9 entirely. He stated he had <br />concerns with development on the periphery of the City where a developer <br />wouldn't be able to secure a high score for in-fill. Mayor Brandes spoke <br />and stated the City Council wants strong feelings and input from the <br />Planning Commission on this item for the Council public hearing which <br />will be held on August 1. <br />The public hearing was closed. <br />-4- <br />