My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN062904
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
CCMIN062904
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:40 AM
Creation date
6/25/2004 3:41:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
6/29/2004
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN062904
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
under the existing General Plan and unless that changed and the City wanted to add a <br />different type of housing. <br /> <br />Commissioner Roberts asked if congregate living counts towards the housing cap <br />numbers. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift said that is something the City Council would have to be addressed in the <br />General Plan Update. Assisted living units are not subject to the City's growth <br />management program. Most of assisted living development is done in commercial and <br />office designated property in the General Plan. There is a debate of whether these units <br />count towards meeting the City's regional fair share needs, which ABAG is addressing. <br />Most of the properties developers have looked at for building assisted living are in <br />commercial and office zoned areas. <br /> <br />Commissioner Fox asked about the increase in the noise levels indicated in the Livermore <br />Airport expansion. The Livermore Plan recommends not having units built outside of <br />the current boundaries of the Livermore Airport protection areas. She wanted to know if <br />staff had discussed this with Livermore staff. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift said that discussion had not yet taken place. He understood the document <br />indicated Livermore's recommendation that no houses be placed near the airport and <br />discouraged housing from being built in this location. That EIR states from a noise <br />standpoint housing is fine and if the airport is expanded there is not a problem. City staff <br />believes that a better job can be done with the noise analysis component. It is unlikely <br />that expanding the Airport Protection Area is in Livermore's plan. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ayala asked if this would rule out Staples Ranch. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift said that if Council did not want to add any more housing adjacent to the <br />airport protection boundaries, it would impact Staples Ranch and a small area on the <br />Hansen Property. The area closest to the protection area, which is the final phase of the <br />Stoneridge Drive Specific Plan, and the Mohr School area, has mitigation measures that <br />are more extensive than some of the housing that was built further to the west. <br />Complaints come from everywhere, but there are more complaints from houses that do <br />not have the noise mitigation that was built in the most recent projects within the <br />Stoneridge Drive Specific Plan. The two keys of this are mitigation and type of housing. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hosterman asked how many units are involved in the Vintage Hills <br />property and all of the properties within the Hacienda Business Park. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift said 150 to 200 are all that the sites could handle. <br /> <br />The Council first discussed the Vintage Hills Shopping Center site. Because Mr. <br />Campbell owns property within 500 feet of said site, Councilmember Campbell reeused <br />himself and left the Council Chambers. <br /> <br />Minutes of the 4 06.29.04 <br />Joint Workshop <br />City Council & Planning Commission <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.