My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 072507
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
PC 072507
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:30:57 PM
Creation date
10/29/2007 9:58:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
7/25/2007
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Ranch units. He added that this is a unique circumstance and not precedent-setting, for <br />the sake of the Land Use Element, recommending to the City Council that whatever <br />number of units without garages be exempt from the housing cap if used for affordable <br />housing or TOD. <br /> <br />Commissioner O’Connor commented that this is dangerous territory of garages versus <br />open parking and Senior apartments without garages. He expressed concern about not <br />having the final proposal for Staples Ranch. He indicated that he has no problem with <br />giving the leftover units that are not apartments for TOD but would not like to set a <br />precedent should the project come up with 240 two-bedroom units. <br /> <br />Ms. Harryman clarified that this would not be setting a precedent if it is applied only to <br />the Staples Ranch project rather than to something general. She noted that this is <br />considered on a case-by-case basis, such as the assisted living facility on the corner of <br />Sunol Boulevard and Case Avenue which the City Council did not count as housing units <br />under the cap. She noted that she did not know the rational behind the Council’s decision <br />or the housing types but that while there is parking, there are no garages. <br /> <br />Ms. Stern noted that most of the units have kitchens, and the rational was that the rent not <br />only includes a place to live but other types of services such as congregate services, <br />congregate meals even if they have their own place to cook, taxi services, personal <br />health, and other services as well. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank stated that the larger issue is what the Commission should do to <br />encourage affordable housing and TOD as the City approaches the housing cap. He <br />indicated that he would to trade the 240 units for affordable housing and TOD even if it <br />meant going 240 units over the housing cap. <br /> <br />Ms. Stern stated that staff has received sufficient direction at this point to provide some <br />input to the City Council regarding what the Commission feels about the issue of <br />applying some units toward affordable housing and TOD. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pearce stated that she was interested in making Hacienda Business Park <br />viable in whatever way possible as this is important for sustainability and the health of <br />the City. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank concurred and stated that if the units are not given to Hacienda, <br />they should be affordable housing units. <br /> <br />Commissioner Narum agreed but noted that she would not want to exempt these units <br />from the housing cap if they turn around and build big houses. She added that she would <br />like a balance and recognition that some units will affect infrastructure and should not be <br />exempt from the cap. <br /> <br />Commissioner O’Connor stated that it would be difficult to recommend how many units <br />should be taken away from the project and moved to TOD if there is no plan on what the <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 25, 2007 Page 28 of 35 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.