01 8-27-2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

commercial square footage cap that exists in Hacienda at 10 million square feet, it adds the 1,271 units under the concentrated alternative and it concludes that it is not much different than the impacts that we get with the proposed General Plan and General Plan model. Councilmember Cook-Kallio confirmed that workshops are noticed the same as Council meetings. She said that while she appreciates that people want to be heard, there is also the responsibility of people to check their mail and attend meetings. She said meetings are also televised, noted Pleasanton has a lot of public participation, and thinks the City is properly noticing meetings. Commissioner Fox asked that the task force also look at the safety of pedestrians and cars planned to be in this are, and how people within the business park will be able to drive and walk safely and identify any tools needed. Vice Mayor Thorne confirmed with staff that sufficient direction had been provided. Mark Sweeney asked Vice Mayor Thorne to re-open the public hearing, as there was one other matter he wanted to receive direction on. Vice Mayor Thorne re-opened the public hearing. Mr. Sweeney said the group did not talk about the freestanding affordable project versus the inclusionary and he said he felt a great opportunity was being missed if the Commission and Council did not take them up on the offer to study this project. He said the City will be able to get very affordable rents and they cannot offer those same rents if they do an inclusionary project. He said they have a 178-unit apartment project in Pleasanton which he co-owns which is stand-alone affordable. It is in complete compliance with the inclusionary zoning ordinance, there is precedent and it works. He said when the plans were conceived for the projects, they thought the Planning Commission and Council would jump on the idea because of the lower rents. He therefore asked for direction as to whether or not he should plan for this or not. Vice Mayor Thorne said it was his assumption that this would be part of the task force process and did not feel it needed to be addressed tonight. Mr. Sweeney said the most compelling reason is that the property owners will not be developing the parcel. They must engage one of the affordable housing leaders such as Bridge, Eden or EAH who must be in the process. Chair Blank agreed that the stakeholders are not the developers; however, the reason the Council and Commission are not making the decision now is to allow the process of having a workshop and an outreach program work. If this decision is made, they would be setting the standard. Councilmember Sullivan suggested this become a topic of discussion in the process, possibly one of the first. He said he was uncomfortable in providing direction now because he has concerns about a concentrated affordable project versus inclusionary. Mr. Sweeney said Pleasanton has set a precedent for having freestanding, affordable projects, and he wanted to confirm whether or not they would have to go the inclusionary route, believing they would miss a great opportunity if they did not study this further. Commissioner Narum asked for a brief explanation from Mr. Sweeney as to why building the 80 units separate versus inclusionary in the adjoining development would make the development so much more affordable. Mr. Sweeney said there are three things that will make the project economically viable; 1) a huge cash infusion from the developers to the affordable housing CCIPC Joint Workshop Minutes 17 August 27, 2008