My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN112905
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
CCMIN112905
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:43 AM
Creation date
1/27/2006 4:13:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
11/29/2005
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN112905
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
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
<br />the number of times for review. The ordinance should be reviewed as well. He wanted <br />a certain number of units from the housing cap held in reserve to cover in-fill uses later <br />on. There needs to be some flexibility for things that may come up in the future. <br />Regarding the jobs/housing balance, he felt everyone understood that given the housing <br />cap and urban boundary limits that Pleasanton will never be able to achieve an absolute <br />jobs/housing balance. He felt it was a pipe dream. The policies recommended in the <br />staff report are extremely good and should be included in the General Plan update with <br />the understanding that there will be units that will not be able to be affordable because <br />of the location of the development, such as the south Pleasanton hills. Regarding other <br />issues identified in community meetings, he did not agree with reducing the housing <br />cap, but he did agree with holding some in reserve for flexibility in later years. He <br />believed the market should determine housing size and felt the Planning Commission <br />can review applications as they come through the process. <br /> <br />Matt Sullivan referred to the Staples Ranch project and wanted to understand the <br />precedent being set. The staff report referred to the 70-room Eden Villa assisted living <br />facility on Mohr Avenue and the new facility at Junipero and he asked how are those the <br />same or different than what is proposed on Staples as far as services, level of care, <br />etc.? How is Ridge View Commons the same or different? <br /> <br />Janice Stern said many aspects are similar. In the Staples Ranch facility, it <br />serves people from the time when they are independent to the time they need skilled <br />nursing care. The new assisted living facility serves two levels, those needing <br />assistance as well as an Alzheimer unit. Ridge View Commons is for those who are <br />completely independent without any contracted support care services through the <br />housing facility. <br /> <br />Mr. Sullivan referred to the food care provided at Ridge View and asked for <br />clarification of who can participate. <br /> <br />Mr. Fialho explained the kitchen is run by Open Heart Kitchen, which is a non- <br />profit organization providing congregate meals throughout the Valley and Alameda <br />County. The program is run out of the kitchen that is located at Ridge View Commons, <br />but is open and available to anyone over 62 years of age who resides in the Tri-Valley <br />area. The service costs $3.00 for evening meals offered Monday through Friday. <br /> <br />Mr. Sullivan summarized the Staples project has a range of residents from <br />completely independent, such as those in the 65 units, to the rest of the development, <br />which includes some kind of assisted care. He tried to find an equation of how to count <br />the units. <br /> <br />Ms. Stern said other than the 65 units; there are about 600 apartment units with <br />some subset of that representing more assistance than others. <br /> <br />Joint Workshop <br />City Council/Planning Commission <br /> <br />13 <br /> <br />11/29/05 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.