Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Iserson replied that it depends on how Hacienda proposes to use the square <br />footage. In some cases, they are considering relinquishing some or all of that square footage <br />and in other cases they would retain that and build houses. It all depends on the proposal that <br />is presented to the city in terms of how that is structured. <br /> <br />Ms. McGovern hoped the traffic studies included all that office space since Council has <br />seen nothing to indicate they will not build that. She then referred to the expansion of <br />Stone ridge Mall and asked if the infrastructure around the Mall was adequate to serve <br />residential units to the West Dublin BART station? <br /> <br />Mr. Iserson said it was. The BART station has always been contemplated along with <br />other development. It would only be a matter of changing the office to residential and the <br />infrastructure could handle that. <br /> <br />Ms. McGovern asked if the residential would generate less traffic than the office use? <br /> <br />Mr. Iserson answered that it could depending on the assumptions for a transit-oriented <br />development. Staff would consider that carefully in the traffic study. <br /> <br />Ms. McGovern referred to a presentation by the Metropolitan Transit Commission at a <br />LAVTA meeting about transit-oriented development. The savings in traffic can be as low as 5%, <br />so she was not certain how the city can say 25% will be saved. She asked how staff calculated <br />that? <br /> <br />Mr. Iserson indicated staff had urged Hacienda to be conservative in the assumptions <br />and to make sure in their case studies and analysis of similar projects that they use areas <br />similar to Pleasanton and not take cases completely different and try to apply to this community. <br /> <br />Steve Brozosky clarified that the study MTC presented was for the Pleasant Hill BART <br />station, which is pretty close to Pleasanton. He then referred to the Valley Trails property, which <br />is owned by a single owner, and asked if there was any regulation that would prevent them from <br />subdividing public and institutional property to have multiple owners? <br /> <br />Mr. Iserson said there was no regulation against subdividing the lot. The application <br />would have to go through the parcel map procedure and there would be minimum lot size <br />requirements. <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky referred to the southeast hills area and indicated the city is not in <br />negotiations with the owners of the Oak Grove Hills. There is a mediation process between the <br />neighborhood and developer to determine an acceptable number of units that would be realistic <br />for the property owner and acceptable to the neighborhood. <br /> <br />Mr. Fialho clarified that it was a facilitated process and city staff is assisting that process. <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky further clarified that whatever is decided upon in that process will be <br />presented to the city, but the city is not obligated to accept any solution presented. He also <br />noted there were four properties in the area, but the city staff has not talked to the other <br />property owners as yet. <br /> <br />Joint Workshop <br />City CounciVPlanning Commission <br /> <br />15 <br /> <br />04/25/06 <br />