CCMIN082001 - Laserfiche WebLink

strongly that we should have more entry level and mixed housing types. She also felt Pleasanton has enough million dollar houses. She agreed a church could be a good underlying land use for the school site. She wanted E1 Charro to connect to 580 and to Stanley. She believed circulation is a major problem in the east part of town and if that connection is there from E1 Charro to Stanley, it would solve some of the problem and provide a connection if the school facility needs access from the east side of town. She felt the County and the Staples area could help with that connection. She thought housing for seniors was better on the Bernal property because it was close to the senior center. Ms. Dennis felt circulation was the key to the best use of this site. It is important to have better access. People cut through to save time. By connecting E1 Charro to Stanley, Stoneridge to Jack London, and Busch to E1 Charro, it will create faster ways for people to get where they are going without going through neighborhoods. She liked Ms. Michelotti's suggestion about making streets similar to those in Birdland. There are secret passageways that only the neighbors know. She felt it was a good way to discourage cut-through traffic, because those who don't live there will probably get lost. This property has potential for many things and she felt it was a mistake to continuously reduce the density to get rid of the traffic problem. She wanted to make the potentials for this property available by improving the circulation. It makes sense to have an underling plan for the school site. It also makes sense to look at the Hansen property as an opportunity in the grand scheme of things. She also wanted staff to look at how much development is necessary to have whatever is built there to make contribution for roads to link areas. She felt there are many things to be done on this site that would not impact the neighborhoods. One speaker said there is no law that says we have to have affordable housing in Pleasanton. The fact is there are a number of laws that require the City to provide its fair share of affordable housing. We have adopted an inclusionary housing ordinance to provide that all developments would have 15% of the units affordable. There is state and county law that also requires that the City provide affordable housing. Measure D was enacted County-wide and it said that land like this is going to be used to meet housing requirements because it is inside the urban growth boundary and adjacent to existing urban development. She said there is no way for her to support a project that does not respect the wishes of the voters. If we solve the circulation problem, it is doable. She felt affordable housing would be an asset, not a problem. She quoted from Measure D arguments "It is no secret that although cities and counties generally manage to produce legally adequate housing elements, this does not mean that all of the affordable housing that is needed or that state law contemplates actually gets built. To some extent, this is because elected legislative bodies of cities and counties generally listen to their constituents and balance other more popular policies such as neighborhood preservation against pro-affordable housing policies contemplated by state law. Measure D in contrast is a clear statement by the voters that however much they value open space and agriculture, affordable housing comes first. As such, Measure D is more closely attuned to state law than the plan it amended (which is the County's General Plan)." She felt the City can use this parcel to provide housing for people of average income and lower income. There is no reason we can't do that on this site provided there is a plan to solve the circulation problem. City Council Workshop 11 08/20/01 Minutes