My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
17
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2021
>
090721
>
17
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/1/2021 9:14:41 AM
Creation date
9/1/2021 9:14:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
9/7/2021
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
NOTES
ACTIVE GROUND FLOOR USE OVERLAY
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
58
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
AGFUO-Public comments <br /> From:Zac Grant <br /> Sent: Friday,August 20, 2021 11:37 AM <br /> To:Shweta Bonn<
[email protected]
> <br /> Cc: Ellen Clark<
[email protected]
>; Melinda Denis<
[email protected]
> <br /> Subject: RE:AGFUO to City Council <br /> Shweta, <br /> PDA will continue to adhere to our previous position on the mixed use exception, attached as directed <br /> most recently to the Planning Commission. Also attached is the comprehensive reading list PDA <br /> considered in forming our position. <br /> In a perfect world, an approval and enforcement approach could verify the authenticity of the active <br /> component of a mixed active/non-active use proposal,such that it wouldn't matter whether the mix <br /> was 25%/75%or some other number. However,the July 28 Planning Commission discussion and <br /> updated City Staff recommendations suggest there are imperfections in the world that make PDA's <br /> preferred solution unworkable. <br /> My recent conversations with members of the PDA Board indicate there is no reason for PDA to expend <br /> further time and energy refining our approach to the mixed use exception. Bottom line,there weren't <br /> naturally occurring examples of mixed use tenancies predating the Overlay,and the only ones to have <br /> developed since then appear to be derivative from the mixed use exception itself. If Iron Horse and <br /> Sculptsations are grandfathered,as they should be, PDA has nothing further to say on the narrow topic <br /> of the mixed use exception. <br /> Far more importantly, PDA encourages the City to keep this deliberation focused on the fate of the <br /> mixed use exception. Mission creep into re-engineering other elements of the Overlay will inevitably <br /> result in a heated re-hashing of the Overlay in total. A quick Google search makes clear that jurisdictions <br /> who have opened this conversation in recent months are uniformly repealing or relaxing similar <br /> ordinances. Given the Overlay was adopted only months prior to the COVID era,there simply isn't <br /> enough data to justify further tweaking it at this time. <br /> To repeat a theme from above, in a perfect world there would be hordes of retail and other active use <br /> tenants clamoring for space downtown. There aren't. Without further changing the Overlay ordinance, <br /> there are ways the City must encourage active use tenants to seek space downtown—which is exactly <br /> where the Overlay says they belong. Though related,this is a separate issue and discussion so I will go <br /> no further here. <br /> Thank you again for everything you have done to facilitate maximum consideration and input from PDA <br /> on this matter. <br /> Best regards, <br /> Zac <br /> Zac Grant <br /> Executive Director <br /> Pleasanton Downtown Association <br /> Distributed to City Council for the September 7, 2021, meeting Page 23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.