CITY OF PLEASANTON
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 8, 2022
This meeting was conducted in accordance with Governor Newsom' s Executive Order N- 29- 20 and AB 361 COVID- 19 pandemic protocols.
SPECIAL MEETING
Mayor Brown called the teleconferenced regular meeting of the City Council from various remote locations to order at the hour of 6: 00 p. m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown
Absent: None
MEETING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
1. Public Comment regarding items not listed on the agenda — None.
PUBLIC HEARING
2. Continued from adjourned regular meeting February 1, 2022 — Housing Element Update - Review and approve potential sites to be considered for future rezoning for residential development and inclusion in the environmental analysis as part of the Sites Inventory for the 2023- 2031 ( 6th Cycle) Housing Element Update
Mayor Brown opened the public hearing.
Wally Mayer recalled mixed-use zoning was common in Pleasanton when he was younger. He advised it makes sense to go back to more mixed- use zoning amidst increased carbon footprint concerns so there are services where people live. He referenced a project in the City of Dublin with housing above a commercial area and advised the proposed Valley Plaza project will have similar services to benefit residents.
Kendra Mayott expressed concerns about the lot behind Donlon Elementary School, noting there is school access through the backside on Payne Road where it is safer and has less traffic. She advised there are traffic concerns on Las Positas Boulevard at school end times from both Donlon and Foothill High School where the street narrows to one lane. She requested help with traffic issues in this area if more housing is added. She requested the area be single- story homes to match the neighborhood and more green space for Donlon students at recess if this lot is developed.
Ahmad Sheikholeslami, Pleasanton Unified School District ( PUSD), advised three PUSD properties are being considered tonight so PUSD has greater opportunities and flexibility to address housing issues for students and staff. He reported the schools are overcrowded and having its properties developed will allow PUSD to increase the land value and to look at a diverse set of solutions to its issues. He requested the PUSD properties stay on the list for further analysis and consideration. He explained the properties would have to go through a regulatory process before they could be sold to a developer.
PUSD intends to keep Donlon and an appropriately sized field and would only consider selling a portion of the field. He reported the Neal property cannot support a new school because there are not enough students in the area. PUSD would like to consider selling this property as an option to purchase a property where the student population will increase due to the new housing. He reported PUSD' s 50- year- old administrative building poorly serves its students, especially those with special needs while housing its maintenance yard in the heart of downtown. PUSD is in the planning process for a relocation to a modern facility.
In response to Mayor Brown, Mr. Sheikholeslami confirmed relocating Village high school will require land which is why PUSD needs to monetize its existing sites to afford one in an appropriate location.
They would also relocate to neighboring Hearst Elementary School. PUSD is expanding transitional kindergarten to 4 year olds so it will have to reimagine its facilities.
City Attorney Dan Sodergren recommended discussing Sites 25 and 26 first and having a separate discussion for each. He requested PUSD representatives stay on the line for those discussions.
Mayor Brown requested Mr. Sheikholeslami and PUSD staff to remain for questions. Mr.
Sheikholeslami agreed.
City Attorney Sodergrenclarifiedall public commentsare acceptable, but requeststhe City Council reserve its questions and comments on Sites 25 and 26.
Joseph Hernan reported he lives near the PUSD administrative office and has several concerns, including the potential density of the site which would exacerbate traffic and parking issues. He lamented how PUSD' s taxpayer- financed buildings have fallen into a state of disrepair and noted he is strongly opposed to this potential development. He expressed concern that there are plans to put a number of these high-density projects all over the City, highlighting the five-story apartment building plannedfor HarrisonStreetacrossfrom the PleasantonLibrary. He reportedhe is notthe only resident who only recently became aware of this project and advised the City should do outreach.
Linda Randes addressed concerns about Site 19 near her home on Black Avenue. She reported there has been a recent increasein traffic and the site reportdoes not mentiontraffic from either nearby Alisal Elementary School or Walnut Grove Elementary School. She advised her street also receives traffic from Harvest Park Middle School and Amador Valley High School. She noted the report also does not mentionthe post officetraffic or DoloresBengstonAquatic Center. She requestedthe City Council consider other options for the feasibility of the Black Avenue site.
Lisa Denton expressed opposition to the Donlon field housing site because the school does not have any green space within its fence line. She advised it is an access issue hindering state physical education standards. She reported Donlon students currently run the mile on blacktop despite the close field because they do not always have access to it. She inquired as to how much field space PUSD officialswouldleavefor Donlon's studentsif the lot is developed. She requestedthe remainingportion of the field be placedwithinDonlon's fenceline, that onlysingle-storyhomesbe builton the lot, andto continue school access from Payne Road. She advised students should have a track in addition to the field but noted it is a matter for PUSD.
In responseto the City Clerk, MayorBrownconfirmedthereshouldnot be repeatspeakersdiscussing the same site they discussed at the previous meeting before the item was continued.
Jim Summers, Presidentof the DeSilvaGrouprepresentingthe ownershipof the Merrittproperty (Site 22), thankedthe HousingCommissionand PlanningCommissionfor keepingthe site on the inventory list. He requestedthe CityCouncilkeepthe siteonthe listfor the HousingElement.
ChristineBourgreportedshe is a retiredteacherandthe currentPUSDheadquartersis in a very convenientlocation. Sheexpressedconcernsaboutthesite beingrezonedfor housing. Shenotedall of the many services PUSD performs on the site would need to be relocated from this central location and demolishingthe buildingswould be harmfulto the environmentwhile movingelsewherewould be costly. 250 housing units would add more traffic to an existing problem while causing more pollution.
City Council Minutes Page 2 of 27 February 8. 2022
She expressed concern that developers could turn the site into a building like the one proposed for Harrison Street. She requested it be removed from the list of possible housing sites.
Veena expressed concerns about the potential influx of residents overcrowding schools. Mayor Brown encouraged her to call into a PUSD meeting and ask them how they plan to address potential overcrowding because it is their responsibility.
Aditi Nair advised Mr. Sheikholeslami is correct about Donlon being an impacted and overcrowded school. She questioned his comments about new residents helping falling enrollment. She noted more than 28 new families have moved into Val Vista and expressed doubts about PUSD' s enrollment figures. Mayor Brown encouraged Ms. Nair to call into a PUSD meeting for better answers.
Joe Chillinksy advised the Pleasanton Municipal Code ( PMC) defines medium- density as being between 2 to 8 units per acre but the current proposal increases this to 15 to 20. He advised the proposal would also increase the definition of low-density from 0-2 units per acre to 2 to 7, along with creating a low-to- medium- density class of 8- 14 units per acre. He requested an additional review of medium- density sites to see if they could be more appropriately classified as low- to- medium- density, particularly the Tri- Valley Inn ( Site 16) which directly abuts residential single- family houses in the Birdland community. He commented it does not make sense to allocate 50 units into its 2. 5 acres.
Brian Casey thanked the City Council for continuing this topic and requested they make decisions fitting developments with existing communities. He questioned if the City would be able to fill the nearly 6,000 units mandated by the State. He expressed concerns about the City' s strategy for what to do with the housing.
Mayor Brown closed the public hearing.
Mayor Brown clarified the purpose of the meeting is to select sites for environmental study. She advised the City Council would not rezone sites or approve projects tonight. She reported the City Council will round up its numbers because some sites may fall off the list for environmental concerns, including concerns over traffic and air quality. She advised any properties not removed from the list today may be removed or downsized in the future. She noted this is the sixth eight- year cycle of the City' s Regional Housing Needs Allocation ( RHNA).
Director Ellen Clark advised staff is requesting the City Council review a list of sites, density assumptions, and Planning Commission recommendations on a preliminary draft Housing Sites Inventory. She explained these sites would be included in the City' s California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) report for potential inclusion in the Housing Element and rezoning.
Director Clark reported as part of the Preliminary Sites Inventory, the City must identify and rezone enough space for at least 3,143 new housing units at a variety of affordability levels. She advised for this initial inventory list it is recommended to include a 50% buffer to allow for refinement through the next steps of the process such as an EIR, review by the California Department of Housing and Community Development, and ongoing public input. She noted the final site inventory for the Housing Element may include fewer sites and smaller buffers.
In response to Mayor Brown, Director Clark clarified the City is assigned a target number of housing units as part of each eight- year RHNA cycle. She advised many parcels within the City are already zoned residential but are not fully built out, in addition to sites identified in the last RHNA cycle that remain undeveloped. He clarified the 3, 143 figure is what the City needs to find in addition to what already exists to meet its RHNA allocation of nearly 6,000 units.
In response to Mayor Brown, Director Clark reported CEQA requires the City to fully analyze all of the potential environmental impacts before approving a development.
City Council Minutes Page 3 of 27 February 8, 2022
Director Clark reported the goal for tonight's meeting is to identify sites and to assign a realistic capacity estimate to each site. She reported the City has been advised to take a conservative approach to capacity using safe harbor assumptions and to consider low and medium- density sites to be able to develop at the average density within the range and high- density sites to develop at the minimum end of the range, meaning 30 or 45 units per acre. She reported the high- density sites receive extra scrutiny from HCD on its density assumptions. She noted the State also keeps a correlation between density and affordability for low-income and moderate- income developments. She advised the City can go outside of the State' s parameters, but it places a higher burden of proof on the City.
Director Clark reviewed the presentation at the February 1 meeting, noting the Planning Commission identified 29 sites, recommending 23 of them for an EIR with a capacity of 4,844 units. She reported the meeting did have extensive public comments, but the item was continued ahead of Council questions or discussion. She advised the City has received about 75 additional written comments since the last meeting with the majority focused on the Donlon site.
Director Clark reported staff recommends hearing Site 25 (PUSD-District) and Site 26 (St. Augustine) first. City Attorney Sodergren reported his recommendation is to take questions and comments about Site 25 first, followed by Site 26, and then questions and comments on the remaining potential sites.
In response to Councilmember Testa, City Attorney Sodergren confirmed his recommendation is to proceed in this order, but it would be up to the City Council if she can ask questions about the overarching process at this time.
In response to Councilmember Balch, City Attorney Sodergren advised it is up to the City Council if general questions will be allowed at this time. He reiterated his recommendation would be to take them separately.
Councilmember Arkin advised she is fine either way but noted it might be best to take general non-site- specific questions first.
Mayor Brown and Councilmember Narum agreed.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Director Clark clarified HCD requires the City to include an inventory with an estimated capacity for each site based on reasonable capacity assumptions. She confirmed the need to have a range does create having a number above and beyond the capacity but added this is an inevitable outcome of the State process. She advised they will end up with more sites than needed because they can only count the conservative estimate for each high- density site. She reported 50% is the initial buffer and noted at this early stage before environmental review, it is sensible to identify more sites than the City will need understanding the list will shrink before the Housing Element is finalized. She advised the City Council will have an opportunity at this meeting to adjust the projected density ranges.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Director Clark confirmed HCD recommends a 25- 35% buffer in the final inventory. She advised this is a recommendation from HCD and not statutory and noted so many cities are adopting a narrower buffer. She advised staff recommends it is prudent to go higher at this step because it is likely some of the sites will fall off the list following their CEQA review.
Councilmember Testa advised her understanding is that the HCD preferred buffer is 10- 15%. She agreed it is prudent to have a buffer at this stage but advised the City Council should be realistic about having a buffer as high as 50%.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Director Clark clarified when a site has been included in the Housing Element for two cycles like all of the City' s previously identified high- density sites have, the City Council Minutes Page 4 of 27 February 8. 2022
City has to allow projects including a minimum percentage of affordable housing to be approved by right and without City discretion. She noted this is less relevant today because changes in state law have removed many opportunities for a city to have input into development. Interim City Manager Brian Dolan advised the City retains the ability to enforce its published objective standards related to design review.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Director Clark explained she does not believe by right precludes the City from having a public hearing, but it limits the City' s ability to deny a project. She advised the City could still apply its objective design standards.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Director Clark clarified the EIR is program- level because it will look at a broad range of land- use changes across the entire City. She reported staff has not yet considered how demolition and construction' s negative impacts will be treated but advised they are typically included in an environmental review.
In response to Councilmember Arkin, Director Clark explained that putting a site through an environmental review does not compel the City to approve the site. She advised the City can easily take sites off the list, but it is much more difficult to add sites later which is why staff is recommending a larger list for an environmental analysis. She clarified if a site was selected tonight but not included in the final Housing Report, the positive for the City is if a developer wanted to build on the site at a later date their process would be simplified by already having an EIR. She advised this rezoning would be discretionary by the City and there would be no obligation to approve the project simply because an EIR has been performed. She advised it would be advantageous to have sites already vetted if there is a need to rezone more sites in the future due to this scenario. Nothing would preclude the City from including more sites later, but it would be more time- consuming.
In response to Councilmember Balch, Director Clark confirmed due to the new no net loss provision, it could be difficult to meet the State deadlines to identify new sites if they have to start from scratch with an EIR as opposed to having already performed one as part of the current need for buffer sites. She advised this timetable is part of the reasoning of having a B-list of sites that have been vetted to some degree by the City Council even if they are cut before adopting the final Housing Element next year.
In response to Councilmember Narum, Director Clark confirmed an option available to the City Council is having a secondary list of sites not reflected in the Housing Element as a fallback list in case they need to identify more sites due to the no net loss provision.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Director Clark clarified Senate Bill ( SB) 330 says cities cannot remove a residential zone designation unless other sites are rezoned. She noted this means sites can trade sites but there needs to be an alternative site to replace the one being removed as residential zoning.
City Attorney Sodergren reported Councilmembers Testa and Balch both live within 500 feet of a potential site. He advised the State' s Fair Political Practices Commission advised they may take part in the discussion and approval of the list as a whole but they may not offer this same input specifically on sites within close proximity to their homes. He reported the City Council will address Sites 25 and 26 first so Councilmembers Testa and Balch can recuse.
Councilmember Testa recused herself from the discussion on Site 25.
Director Clark advised the question about Site 25, and all sites discussed tonight, is whether or not it should remain in inventory consideration, and if included, whether or not is the recommended density range is appropriate. She reported Site 25 is 10.17 acres owned by PUSD for its offices, maintenance yard, and other facilities but not the playfields. She advised the recommended density range is 15-25 City Council Minutes Page 5 of 27 February 8, 2022
units per acre with an initial capacity assumption of 204 units. She reported the Planning Commission recommended including the site in the initial inventory.
In response to Mayor Brown, Director Clark confirmed the City Council can discuss any preferences for the sites, including mixed- use zoning to include a commercial component on a site. She advised it may change the capacity for housing units on a site. She noted it would be helpful for staff to know the housing to commercial ratio envisioned so they can adjust their estimates accordingly.
Mayor Brown clarified this discussion would only center around a capacity figure for environmental study purposes and is not for an actual rezoning.
Councilmember Narum recommended Site 25 should be included in the EIR with the current density.
She noted they could decrease this site' s capacity, but it is much harder to increase it if it was not done for the EIR.
In response to Councilmember Narum, Director Clark stated 15 to 25 units per acre will typically yield a townhouse- style project with two- or three- story buildings and tuck- under parking. The Andares project on West Las Positas Boulevard is an example of what the site would be likely to see for development.
Interim City Manager Dolan advised if the capacity is closer to 25 units per acre, it would become garden apartments and look like the Civic Center Apartments.
Councilmember Narum reported she agrees with the site' s proposal but would not want to see the density go any higher.
In response to Councilmember Narum, Director Clark clarified a policy intended to have this site be specifically used as affordable housing for teachers could be addressed by the City Council. She explained that mandating the affordable units go to teachers could be a challenge if PUSD is not the site' s developer.
Councilmember Balch reported he is comfortable including the site. He noted there will have to be discussions with PUSD for the coming year about its plans and for EIR purposes they should evaluate an even higher density for portions of the site. He noted how buildings can be designed to be shorter in the front and taller in the back to hide their size and remain compatible with the neighborhood. He agreed this is a good site for workforce housing where residents can walk to downtown, but noted he is not discussing something with the appearance of the Harrison Street project.
Councilmember Arkin reported there has been a lot of public input expressing valid concerns over the density, traffic impacts, area neighborhood cut-throughs, and fronting both historic homes and a major street. Her preference is to not include the site however, if the majority wants the site included, she strongly suggests designating it as workforce housing at 10 units per acre with ground- floor retail.
Mayor Brown reported a residential poll by staff shows a preference for new housing on vacant infill sites instead of building out into undeveloped areas. She advised she is challenged by this site due to legitimate concerns of neighbors about traffic, noise, and the feel of the gateway into downtown. She reported residents could walk to downtown, schools, grocery stores, and others from this centrally located site. She advised PUSD has discussed moving out of the core of the City to more of a business- centric area for years. She expressed support for a lower density for an environmental study and a retail component at a later date.
Councilmember Balch suggested staying at staff recommended density for EIR purposes since there are so many sites to discuss and he would retract his suggestion to increase the density for the site.
City Council Minutes Page 6 of 27 February 8, 2022
Mayor Brown advised she wants the site' s capacity to come down to about 150 units. In response to Mayor Brown, Councilmember Arkin advised the site density could go even lower than 150, aiming for 102 if the site is also mixed- use.
Mayor Brown noted there is no retail on First Street, leading her to think this would be a good mixed- use site. She advised these capacity numbers are only for the EIR but noted the City has scared the neighborhood into thinking there will be a massive housing development.
Councilmember Narum reported she would have difficulty accepting a three- story project on this site, even if the third story was clustered in the center of the site. She advised she would be willing to go lower but reiterated the point of this exercise is to get a high- end worst- case scenario for the EIR. She reported she wants the site to be compatible with the neighborhood. She noted traffic is a concern but there is already a project to improve the intersection this summer and the PUSD site itself already creates a lot of traffic. She advised her preference is to keep the estimate at 20 units per acre but would be willing to back down to 15 units per acre if that keeps the site on the list.
Mayor Brown advised it could be mixed- use zoning with a capacity assumption of 153.
Councilmember Arkin agreed to the 150 capacity with some sort of mixed- use, noting this is just for an EIR and not a final determination. She advised including a workforce housing requirement would be ideal.
In response to Councilmember Balch, Director Clark recommended stipulating a range density with the midpoint being at 150 units. She advised HCD would term it restrictive if they used a fixed number like 150. She recommended using a range from 8 to 20 units per acre to yield the desired 150 units.
In response to Mayor Brown, Director Clark confirmed 15 units per acre for the site' s 10. 7 acres would yield about 153 units and recommended it should be the midpoint.
Mayor Brown advised she is happy to put more houses elsewhere but noted this site is highly- sensitive.
She reported she is hearing a consensus to include the site with a target of 153 units, a workforce housing requirement, and a commercial element.
City Attorney Sodergren advised it would be helpful for clarification to have a motion.
Councilmember Balch urged caution in a commercial element because there is already a lot of vacant retail on Main Street. He reiterated his support for the workforce or teacher- specific housing.
In response to Councilmember Balch, Associate Planner Jennifer Hagen clarified if staff uses a range of 8 to 20 units per acre it would allow for a range from 81 to 203 units with a midpoint density of 142 units.
Councilmember Balch moved to include Site 25 in the EIR with a density of 8 to 20 units per acre and an underlying request for the site to be used for workforce housing. Councilmember Narum seconded the motion.
In response to Councilmember Arkin, Director Clark clarified they are building the overall capacity assumption by tallying the midpoint of the recommended density ranges. She added the State would refuse a single density number for sites due to it being too narrow.
Councilmember Arkin advised the range at the high point is too high for her and called for it to be lower.
She called for a friendly amendment to reduce the maximum.
City Council Minutes Page 7 of 27 February 8, 2022
Councilmember Balch clarified 150 units is his intent and he is trying to reach it with staffs guidance about needing to have a range to meet HCD standards. He advised he is open to a friendly amendment but explained they need to have a range to hit the targeted midpoint.
Councilmember Arkin clarified she would like to see 150 units be the top end of the range.
Director Clark stated a range of 8 to 14 units per acre would yield 142 at the top end but would also have a lower assumed capacity.
Councilmember Balch advised he would like to see if they have the votes without the amendment for the 8 to 20 units per acre range.
Mayor Brown agreed 200 units seems like a large number but advised it does not mean the city Council is approving it. She expressed her belief the traffic study will show First Street is highly impacted making it difficult to build 200 units. She noted this site is harder to work on and so many other sites will be easier. She encouraged the Councilmembers to work hard towards a compromise.
Councilmember Balch reported he does not mind trying to get 150 as a target but clarified he is working within the framework staff is requesting the City Council adhere to. He noted if they reduce the density too much it may work against PUSD' s goals for the site. He explained if the density is too low it may not achieve the goal of producing workforce housing for teachers.
Mayor Brown advised it is a large site at 10.7 acres so she foresees having units of a variety of sizes.
Councilmember Balch agreed but left himself unsure of where it leaves the City Council.
Councilmember Narum expressed confusion regarding the commercial component. She expressed concerns noting all commercial spaces added near the Bay Area Rapid Transit ( BART) station in the last housing cycle which have remained empty for years. She advised she is open to allowing commercial uses but would not like to mandate it due to the potential for slow leasing.
Councilmember Balch advised his motion did not include a commercial element, noting the commercial vacancies on Main Street.
Councilmember Narum inquired if Councilmember Balch is open to an option for commercial usage even just for a small neighborhood store.
Mayor Brown advised she does not want a 7- Eleven in this space.
In response to Mayor Brown, Director Clark clarified sites listed with a specific number and not a range are those where the City has a developer' s proposal or where the site is not conducive to a range. She advised it would be better, especially for reuse sites, to have a range. She noted the City regularly allows for mixed density across a site so long as the aggregate density does not exceed the maximum.
She advised this could allow for a combination of denser workforce- oriented units alongside single- family houses or townhouses on the site.
Councilmember Arkin suggested changing the density range to 8 to 16 units. Director Clark reported this would make the capacity assumption 122 units.
In response to Councilmember Balch, Director Clark confirmed they can state there is an allowance for blended densities on the site.
Councilmember Balch agreed to amend his motion to make the density range 8 to 16 units.
City Council Minutes Page 8 of 27 February 8, 2022
In response to Councilmember Arkin, Councilmember Balch advised he would agree to make commercial usage an option for the site. He clarified his motion is to include Site 25 in the inventory with a density range of 8 to 16 units per acre, making teacher and/ or workforce housing a required or significantly suggested element of site development, allowing for mixed density across the site, and an optional commercial component. Councilmember Narum seconded the motion.
Mayor Brown cheered and commended the Councilmembers for working together. She noted with only four voters on the site an even split means they could not include the site.
MOTION: It was m/s by Balch/ Narum to include Site 25 in the inventory with a density range of 8 to 16 units per acre, making teacher or workforce housing a required or significantly suggested element of site development, allowing for mixed density across the site, and an optional commercial component. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Recuse: Councilmember Testa
Councilmember Balch recused himself from the discussion on Site 26. Councilmember Testa returned to the meeting.
Director Clark inquired if Site 26: St. Augustine should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and should there be any changes to the recommended density range.
Councilmember Arkin believes the site should be included in the inventory and agrees with the recommended density range.
Councilmember Testa agrees the site should be included in the inventory and agrees with the recommended density range. She noted St. Augustine has been asking to use the site for housing for years.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Director Clark clarified all sites could be eligible for an SB 35 density bonus because they would have a residential designation if they meet all SB 35 requirements.
Mayor Brown suggested a higher density as she wants it to fit in the neighborhood and noted it is near an elementary school and downtown. She advised she did not hear any concerns regarding this site.
In response to Mayor Brown, Associate Planner Hagen clarified access to the site is available off Bonita Avenue and Bernal Avenue. She advised the surrounding neighborhood is zoned R1- 65 and advised the proposed density would be consistent with the surrounding neighborhoods.
Councilmember Narum expressed support including Site 26 on the list and supports the density.
MOTION: It was m/s by Narum/Arkin to include Site 26 in the inventory with a density range of 2 to 7 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Recuse: Councilmember Balch
Councilmember Balch returned to the meeting.
Director Clark inquired if Site 1: Lester should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the City Council Minutes Page 9 of 27 February 8, 2022
development area is 14.8 acres and noted there is a total of 31 units recommended and the Planning Commission recommended it be included.
In response to Councilmember Arkin, Director Clark confirmed it is a hilly site and all units would be subject to Measure PP and QQ restrictions. The site is outside of the City limits and annexation will be proposed as part of the development site and would fall into the above- moderate housing requirement.
MOTION: It was m/s by Narum/ Balch to include Site 1 in the inventory with a density of 2 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 2: Stoneridge Mall should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. A total of 18 acres have been identified for infill housing and advised the density is 45 to 75 units per acre and would yield 810 units. The Planning Commission recommended the site be included in the inventory.
In response to Councilmember Balch, Director Clark clarified the 810 units would be in addition to those included in the application by Simon Properties to develop 480 units. Associate Planner Hagen clarified the development application is on pause due to the pandemic and is not currently entitled although it is zoned for 485 units. Director Clark that development is zoned at 40 units to the acre.
In response to Councilmember Balch, Traffic Engineer Mike Tassano reported the Stoneridge Mall has some additional capacity and is dependent on whether the proposed 810- unit project would replace the 350, 000 square feet of future retail or be proposed in addition to it. He advised the Stoneridge and Stoneridge Mall intersection is at capacity. He advised the preference from a transportation perspective would be to develop the west side.
In response to Councilmember Narum, Traffic Engineer Tassano believes if people return to work as normal before the pandemic there will be increased traffic at Stoneridge Mall. He would not be supportive of adding more than the proposed 810 units on the site. He reported the traffic congestion is experienced at Stoneridge Drive and Johnson Drive.
In response to Councilmember Narum, Director Clark explained 45 units per acre is similar to the podium piece of the Vintage Project at Stanley Boulevard and Bernal Avenue. She advised 75 units per acre would be similar to the sites in Dublin which are 5 to 6 story buildings.
Councilmember Arkin recommended increasing the density on this site as it is near to transportation and has very little impact on neighborhoods. She advised the developer wants to go higher density.
She recommended moving from 50 to 100 units per acre.
In response to Mayor Brown, Director Clark clarified density for the development at the Hacienda BART Station is 35 to 40 units per acre. Interim City Manager Dolan advised none of the projects that were built were over 30 units per acre although there were some higher designations.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Director Clark explained a Stoneridge Specific Plan has been a work plan item for a couple of years, but the coordination has been difficult in the face of the other priorities. She advised this process would set a range of housing for the site and staff would follow up with a more detailed specific plan.
Councilmember Testa recommended increasing the density of the site.
City Council Minutes Page 10 of 27 February 8, 2022
Mayor Brown expressed concern that increasing the density would result in 5 to 6 story buildings and would not fit in with the existing buildings. She advised she would like any new development to look like Pleasanton.
Councilmember Balch expressed concern regarding the units that have already been zoned on the site and is cautious about increasing the density on the site.
Councilmember Narum expressed concerns regarding traffic concerns and maintaining the look and feel of Pleasanton.
Mayor Brown advised with the already zoned 486 units plus the 810 units is approximately 1,300 units and noted there is no reason it cannot move forward in steps.
Director Clark explained the EIR will analyze the bigger envelope of development and the City Council could choose a different base density for the site at that time.
Mayor Brown advised she agrees with staff' s original recommendation.
Councilmember Arkin noted decisions will impact the schools. She advised this is an opportunity to increase density without impacting neighborhoods. She moved to include Site 2 in the inventory with a density of 50 to 95 units per acre.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Traffic Engineer Tassano clarified he is picturing the 400 units and the 800 units along with the potential of 350, 000 square feet of retail. He advised if the traffic goes back to pre- pandemic conditions it is a concern to add the additional 800 units. He explained if conditions go back to the status quo there will be several traffic impacts in the area.
Councilmember Testa seconded the motion.
In response to Mayor Brown, Interim City Manager Dolan confirmed the City would collect impact fees for a large development project, but it would not be enough to cover all needed infrastructure improvements. He expressed concern that placing the burden on a developer to pay for large infrastructure changes may cause HCD to deny the site.
Councilmember Balch advised he will not be able to support the current motion based on the traffic impacts but will support the staff' s original recommendation.
Mayor Brown expressed support for the location but expressed concern for the increase in density. She agrees with Councilmember Arkin that this is a great location for additional housing. She advised she can support the motion if the density is reduced.
Councilmember Arkin reminded the dais that the developer is interested in making this work at an even higher density. Mayor Brown advised she could support a 55 to 75 unit per acre density.
Councilmember Arkin suggested 60 to 80 units per acre. Director Clark advised 55 units per acre is 990 units.
Councilmember Balch cited the traffic concerns stated by Traffic Engineer Tassano and is having a hard time supporting any increase in density even if the developer is interested in making it work. He urged the dais to use caution in going any higher than 55 to 75 units per acre density.
In response to Mayor Brown, Traffic Engineer Tassano advised General Plan policy allows a level of service F at the freeway onramps. He advised improvements have been made but the volume levels continue to increase to get to the BART station or get to Workday. He advised if housing is put on the west side there is a possibility that traffic will not be so negatively impacted.
City Council Minutes Page 11 of 27 February 8, 2022
Councilmember Narum advised she is unable to support a density increase based on Traffic Engineer Tassano' s concerns. She noted that although there have already been many traffic improvements and there are still issues. She expressed support for a specific plan or master plan for the area.
Mayor Brown noted Kaiser' s parking lot is also zoned for housing.
Councilmember Arkin amended her motion to 50 to 80 units per acre density. She acknowledged there will be traffic impacts that will need to be addressed along with the school impacts.
Councilmember Testa accepted the amended motion as a second.
MOTION: It was m/s by Arkin/ Testa to include Site 2 in the inventory with a density of 50 to 80 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 3: PUSD — Donlon should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the development area is 5.5 acres with a recommended density of 5 units per acre. She advised it was recommended by the Planning Commission to include the site in the inventory.
Councilmember Testa moved to remove the site from further consideration citing impacts to the schools and community input.
Councilmember Arkin seconded the motion. She expressed concern regarding the impact on the schools and does not believe PUSD should sell the land.
Councilmember Narum believes it needs to be included in the EIR. She referenced the concerns of the community about building housing on the site but noted they also did not want a school built on the property. She would like to be consistent and make sure all sites that are next to single- family homes go through the EIR. She advised she will not be able to support the motion.
Councilmember Balch reported the community feedback is strong but noted PUSD did ask the City Council to include it in the EIR so they can build schools where they are needed. He agreed with Councilmember Narum's recommendation that all sites next to single-family homes should go through the EIR. He expressed support for keeping the site on the list so it can go through the EIR.
Mayor Brown advised she heard community feedback from residents. She believes 28 single-family homes would fit the neighborhood. She referenced the annual survey that people are looking to buy homes in Pleasanton. She advised the school board trustees recommended the site be included in the EIR and she is going to support their recommendation.
MOTION: It was m/s by Testa/ Arkin to remove Site 3 from further consideration as recommended and noted. Motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Testa
Noes: Councilmembers Balch, Narum, Mayor Brown
Absent: None
Councilmember Balch moved to include Site 3 in the inventory with a density of 5 units per acre for the EIR only. Councilmember Narum seconded the motion.
City Council Minutes Page 12 of 27 February 8, 2022
Councilmember Arkin advised residents she spoke to would rather live with a school than houses on the site. She reiterated the site should be preserved for a future school or a future school expansion.
She expressed concern there will not be available land suitable for a school site when needed.
Mayor Brown advised the school board recommended the site be included in the EIR and noted it is not a rezoning or approval of any project. She expressed support for the motion for the EIR.
MOTION: It was m/s by Balch/ Narum to include Site 3 in the inventory with a density of 5 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Balch, Narum, Mayor Brown
Noes: Councilmembers Arkin, Testa
Absent: None
Mayor Brown recessed the meeting at 8:48 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:53 p.m.
Mayor Brown proposed clustering 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 for discussion.
Councilmember Arkin recommended 6 and 9 be discussed separately and was unopposed by the remainder of the dais.
Director Clark reported Site 4: Owens includes the Motel 6 and Tommy T' s site on 2.3 acres and has a recommended density range of 30 to 40 units per acre with a capacity of 71 units. The Planning Commission recommended including this site. She reported Site 5: Laborers Council is within Hacienda, is 1.36 acres, has a capacity of 41 units, a density range of 30 to 40 units per acre, and the Planning Commission recommends it be included in the site inventory list. She reported Site 7:
Hacienda Terrace is 2 acres, has a capacity of 60 units, a density range of 30 to 40 units per acre, and the Planning Commission recommends it be included in the site inventory list. She reported Site 8:
Muslim Community Center is 5 acres, has a capacity of 60 units, a density range of 15 to 25 units per acre, and the Planning Commission recommends it be included in the site inventory list.
In response to Councilmember Narum, Director Clark clarified the capacity for Site 8 is 15 to 25 units per acre with an assumed capacity of 100 units.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Director Clark confirmed all sites would be eligible for the SB 35 density bonus.
Councilmember Arkin moved to include Sites 4, 5, 7, and 8 in the inventory at the densities as recommended by staff. Councilmember Testa seconded the motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Arkin/ Testa to include Sites 4, 5, 7, and 8 in the inventory at the densities as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 6: Signature Center should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the development area is 11 acres with a recommended density of 30 to 40 units per acre with a capacity of 330 units. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to include the site in the inventory. She noted the proposal is to redevelop the portion of the site that has the existing parking structure on it.
City Council Minutes Page 13 of 27 February 8, 2022
Councilmember Arkin advised this is a good site close to transportation and retail. She recommended the density go up to 35 to 45 units per acre.
Councilmember Balch expressed concern about increasing the density as staff advised the site is at the density it could handle.
Councilmember Arkin noted she understands the concerns but would like to see the density increase.
In response to Councilmember Balch, Director Clark advised the City needs to be realistic about the capacity on each site. She advised on this site there is a constrained footprint unless the existing buildings are demolished. She noted the proposal from the property owner asks for less density due to some of the height restraints.
Councilmember Balch moved to include Site 6 in the inventory with a density of 30 to 40 units per acre as recommended and as noted.
In response to Councilmember Arkin, Director Clark explained Associate Planner Hagen is keeping a tally of the RHNA gap and the buffer. Once the City Council completes its decisions on each site the count will be reviewed and City Council can revisit sites as necessary.
Councilmember Narum seconded Councilmember Balch' s motion.
Mayor Brown expressed concern that this development is not near a park and is challenged on how to make it feel like Pleasanton. Director Clark advised it will be a site planning exercise for the developer but noted building open space is an expectation of any of the City' s higher- density projects.
In response to Mayor Brown, Traffic Engineer Tassano advised if Clorox Way is closed, traffic will be forced to use Owens Drive which is busy.
Councilmember Testa expressed support for closing Clorox Way as it will create more open space.
Traffic Engineer Tassano advised the developer is running traffic studies, but he is skeptical Owens Drive can handle the additional traffic.
MOTION: It was m/s by Balch/Narum to include Site 6 in the inventory with a density of 30 to 40 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 9: Metro 580 should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the development area is 5 acres with a recommended density of 45 to 75 units per acre with a capacity of 225 units. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to include the site in the inventory.
Councilmember Arkin moved to include Site 9 in the inventory with a density of 45 to 75 units per acre per staff' s recommendation. Councilmember Narum seconded the motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Arkin/ Narum to include Site 9 in the inventory with a density of 45 to 75 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
City Council Minutes Page 14 of 27 February 8, 2022
Director Clark inquired if Site 10: Valley Care should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the development area is 6.12 acres with a recommended density of 30 to 40 units per acre with a capacity of 108 units. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to exclude the site from the inventory as the representatives of Valley Care were not interested in developing the site as a housing site.
In response to Councilmember Balch, Director Clark advised there is a difference between needing to get affirmation from an owner and an owner has no intention to develop housing on their site. She recommends it be taken off the list as it would be hard to get past HCD.
Councilmember Balch moved staff' s revised recommendation to exclude Site 10 from further consideration as recommended and noted. Councilmember Arkin seconded the motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Balch/ Arkin to exclude Site 10 from further consideration as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 11: Old Santa Rita should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the development area is 21. 85 acres with a recommended density of 30 to 60 units per acre with a capacity of 655 units. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to include the site in the inventory.
Councilmember Arkin recommended increasing density on the site. Director Clark advised a higher density may be appropriate for this site and the challenge is that it is a mixture of sites. Councilmember Arkin recommended the density be increased to 35 to 65 units per acre.
Councilmember Balch expressed concern regarding the relocation of businesses in that area as they are mainly service- oriented businesses.
Councilmember Narum shared the same concerns because one of the lots is for the car dealers to store their inventory. She expressed a need to support these important community businesses.
Mayor Brown believes the area needs business improvement and that there are business parks and industrial areas for these businesses to relocate to. She noted this area is close to retail and transportation and is a good location for housing. She expressed support for the staff' s recommendation.
Councilmember Testa noted the State is mandating housing and does not care if the community is out of balance. She advised this site is as good as any for housing.
Councilmember Arkin moved to include Site 10 in the inventory with the staff recommended density of 30 to 60 units per acre. Mayor Brown seconded the motion.
Councilmember Balch advised he would support the motion for the EIR but still expressed concern regarding moving the existing businesses.
MOTION: It was m/s by Arkin/ Brown to include Site 11 in the inventory with a density of 30 to 60 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown City Council Minutes Page 15 of 27 February 8, 2022
Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 12: Pimlico North should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the development area is 2. 12 acres with a recommended density of 30 to 60 units per acre with a capacity of 64 units. She advised it was recommended by the Planning Commission to include the site in the inventory.
Councilmember Testa moved to include Site 12 in the inventory with the staff recommended density of 30 to 60 units per acre. Councilmember Arkin seconded the motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Testa/ Arkin to include Site 12 in the inventory with a density of 30 to 60 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 13: Pimlico South should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the development area is 1.99 acres with a recommended density of 15-25 units per acre with a capacity of 40 units. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to exclude the site from the inventory because the yield is not significant and its proximity to residential housing.
Councilmember Balch reiterated that all sites next so single-family residences need to be all included or all excluded for EIR purposes. He recommends the site be included. Councilmember Narum concurred with Councilmember Balch' s recommendation that the site is included.
Councilmember Arkin does not agree with the consistency issue and believes the City Council has the discretion to remove or keep sites that are appropriate if the buffer is achieved. She expressed support for removing the site from the list per the recommendation of the Planning Commission.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Director Clark confirmed this site would be eligible for the SB 35 density bonus.
Mayor Brown expressed support for keeping the site and noted it as a good shopping area.
Councilmember Balch expressed concern the City Council is willing to leave retail uses in but eliminate industrial and commercial uses. He recommended considering mixed-use on the lower density sites.
Mayor Brown advised that is always a potential if a developer brings a mixed- use project forward.
Councilmember Arkin moved to approve staff' s recommendation to exclude Site 13 from further consideration as recommended and noted. Mayor Brown seconded the motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Arkin/ Brown to approve staff' s recommendation to exclude Site 13 from further consideration as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Testa, Mayor Brown
Noes: Councilmembers Balch, Narum
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 14: St. Elizabeth Seton should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She City Council Minutes Page 16 of 27 February 8, 2022
advised the development area is 2.85 acres with a recommended density of 15 to 25 units per acre with a capacity of 57 units. She advised it was recommended by the Planning Commission to include the site in the inventory. She reported staff also received notification of interest from the Archdiocese.
Councilmember Balch advised there is single- family housing right on the other side but with the density, it is a little different from the Donlon site. He reiterated being consistent.
In response to Mayor Brown, Director Clark presented the aerial image and advised there are higher density units to the north and small- lot single- family. Associate Planner Hagen advised the lots are somewhere between 9 to 11 units per acre at least.
Councilmember Arkin advised she is not opposed to the site but shares Councilmember Balch' s earlier comments that it is not consistent with the area. She inquired if anyone on the dais was interested in lowering the density.
Councilmember Narum advised she agreed with Councilmember Arkin' s comments and recommended lowering the density to 12 to 18 units per acre.
Councilmember Testa advised she is agreeable to lowering the density.
Councilmember Narum moved to include Site 14 in the inventory at the lower density of 12 to 18 units per acre. Councilmember Arkin seconded the motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Narum/ Arkin to include Site 14 in the inventory at the lower density of 12 to 18 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 15: Rheem Drive should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the development area is 9. 77 acres with a recommended density of 8 to 14 units per acre with a capacity of 108 units. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to include the site in the inventory.
Councilmember Narum advised she has the same challenge with this site as she does with Old Santa Rita. She advised she will support including the site in the inventory for the EIR. She noted the density is consistent with the area.
Councilmember Narum moved to include Site 15 in the inventory with the staff recommended density of 8- 14 units per acre. Councilmember Arkin seconded the motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Narum/ Arkin to include Site 15 in the inventory with the staff recommended density of 8 to 14 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 16: Tri-Valley Inn should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the development area is 2.47 acres with a recommended density of 15 to 25 units per acre with a capacity of 50 units. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to include the site in the inventory.
City Council Minutes Page 17 of 27 February 8, 2022
In response to Mayor Brown, Director Clark clarified the restaurant is part of the hotel complex. She clarified it is a townhouse type density and it is expected the development would be 2 to 3 story buildings.
Councilmember Arkin expressed concern regarding the density given the concern of residents of the neighborhood. Director Clark advised reducing the density would allow more space for buffering the units and a smaller scale project but would be the will of the City Council.
Councilmember Narum advised she is not comfortable with the recommended density and recommended the density be reduced so development is kept to a maximum of 2 stories. Director Clark clarified design standards will be developed for all sites and there will be an opportunity to set the parameter around height limits.
Councilmember Narum advised she is uncomfortable with a 3- story development. Director Clark advised for the Downtown Specific Plan staff recommended going with a height limit versus a story limit and it would be up to the City Council to set up a more restrictive limit.
In response to Councilmember Narum, Director Clark advised staff is working to develop objective design standards but is waiting to see what sites will be added to the inventory so the standards can be tailored to the list.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Interim City Manager Dolan advised the existing apartments in the area are 20 to 25 units per acre. He clarified he was speaking to the larger complexes further down Santa Rita Road. He advised if the City tailors the design standards correctly, it can make sure it works for this site in particular. Director Clark confirmed the design standards can be tailored to individual site conditions.
Councilmember Narum moved to include Site 16 in the inventory with the staff recommended density of 15- 25 units per acre for the EIR. Councilmember Arkin seconded the motion but expressed the same concerns as Councilmember Narum.
Mayor Brown advised she will not support a 3-story unit in that neighborhood when a project comes along.
MOTION: It was m/s by Narum/ Arkin to include Site 16 in the inventory with the staff recommended density of 15 to 25 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 17: Mission Plaza should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the development area is 2.22 acres with a recommended density of 30 to 40 units per acre with a capacity of 67 units. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to exclude the site in the inventory.
In response to Mayor Brown, Director Clark advised there were comments at the last public hearing that the owner was willing to take this plaza out of consideration.
In response to Councilmember Narum, Director Clark confirmed the owner wanted Mission Plaza taken out of consideration and Valley Plaza rezoned for mixed- use.
City Council Minutes Page 18 of 27 February 8. 2022
Councilmember Narum moved to approve staff' s recommendation to exclude Site 17 from further consideration as recommended and noted. Mayor Brown seconded the motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Narum/ Brown to approve staff' s recommendation to exclude Site 17 from further consideration as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 18: Valley Plaza should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the development area is 7.33 acres with a recommended density of 30-40 units per acre with a capacity of 220 units. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to exclude the site in the inventory.
In response to Mayor Brown, Director Clark confirmed the majority of the business owners in Valley Plaza are supportive of having this site rezoned including the owner of the Sunshine Saloon and the property owner.
Councilmember Balch advised he is having the same concerns about Valley Plaza as he is about the industrial and commercial areas. He expressed support for having the site go through the EIR but does not support the proposed density. Director Clark recommended reducing the overall density by 25- 30% if a mixed- used component and did not want the buildings to get bigger.
Councilmember Balch and Mayor Brown discussed the densities needed for Councilmember Balch to achieve the zoning he is looking for. Director Clark noted it could be stated that 2.5 of the 7 acres would be non- residential. If City Council changed the density of the site they would no longer be able to be counted as lower- income units. She recommended changing the recommendation to a smaller site area with a similar density versus a lower density across the entire site.
Councilmember Balch moved to include 5.5 acres of Site 18 at the recommended density of 30 to 40 units per acre.
In response to Councilmember Arkin, Director Clark advised the Planning Commission' s recommendation to exclude Valley Plaza from the site inventory came from public comments that were received and concern regarding the loss of businesses and local serving retail.
Councilmember Arkin advised she was leaning towards supporting staff' s recommendation to exclude the site from the inventory. She noted she is not opposed to having this as a mixed- use site and expressed support for Councilmember Balch' s recommendation but advised the Planning Commission' s concern is that there is no real plan for Valley Plaza.
Councilmember Balch noted he is now looking at the list of sites that may not make it on the Housing Element site inventory but possibly may be needed to backfill. He would like to see it included for EIR purposes.
Councilmember Testa advised she would be inclined to take it off the list.
Councilmember Narum expressed support for leaving the item on the list and would want to see some restrictions so the bulk of the retail would be reserved.
Mayor Brown expressed support for studying a small portion of Valley Plaza but retaining the mixed- use feel.
City Council Minutes Page 19 of 27 February 8, 2022
Councilmember Arkin noted she would prefer to exclude the site from the list but would support the review for EIR. She seconded the motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Balch/ Arkin to include 5.5 acres of Site 18 at the recommended density of 30 to 40 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 19: Black Avenue should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the development area is 2.59 acres with a recommended density of 15 to 25 units per acre with a capacity of 52 units. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to include the site in the inventory.
Councilmember Balch pointed out that residents could walk to any school in Pleasanton from this site along with being able to walk to the surrounding retail shops. He acknowledged that traffic is a concern and it does not have a transit element. He encouraged the City Council to think about a slightly higher density at this site to add a few more affordable units.
Councilmember Narum advised she could consider a slightly higher density here and include it in the EIR unless there is an objection from staff.
Councilmember Arkin noted that while it is in fact near schools there will be people who will need to drive their students to school. She believes the EIR will come back with traffic impacts and noted she is unwilling to increase the density.
Councilmember Testa advised she will not support an increase in density and noted SB 35 could increase the number of units.
In response to Mayor Brown, Director Clark explained the Housing Density Bonus Law is tied to the proportion of affordable units included in the project and could range from 5 to 50%.
Mayor Brown agrees Black Avenue is heavily trafficked but is a good location for an in-fill project.
Councilmember Balch moved to include Site 18 in the inventory with the increased density of 30 to 40 units per acre for the EIR.
Mayor Brown advised if the site goes to a higher density, it will require a 4 story building and inquired if it would fit in the neighborhood. Councilmember Balch advised the area is surrounded by non- single family.
Interim City Manager Dolan advised the City has built many projects at 30 units per acre and it cannot be increased without building podium parking. He advised once the density is increased to 40 units per acre it cannot be parked.
Councilmember Balch inquired if it would be more appropriate to go to 20 to 30 units per acre. Director Clark advised given the decisions the City Council has made at this meeting, there is not a shortfall of the lower- income housing units so she recommends keeping it at the non- high- density range.
Councilmember Balch amended his motion to include Site 19 in the inventory with the increased density of 20 to 30 units per acre for the EIR.
City Council Minutes Page 20 of 27 February 8, 2022
Councilmember Arkin advised she will not be able to support the motion if the density increases. She believes at that density there will be traffic impacts.
Mayor Brown advised the motion died due to a lack of a second.
Councilmember Balch moved to include Site 19 in the inventory at the recommended density of 15 to 25 units per acre. Councilmember Narum seconded the motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Balch/ Narum to include Site 19 in the inventory at the recommended density of 15 to 25 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 20: Boulder Court should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the development area is 9.45 acres with a recommended density of 30 to 40 units per acre with a capacity of 284 units. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to include the site in the inventory.
Councilmember Balch expressed concern about losing industrial and commercial areas in the City. He moved to include Site 20 in the inventory at the recommended density of 30 to 40 units per acre.
Councilmember Narum seconded the motion but echoed the concerns of Councilmember Balch.
MOTION: It was m/s by Balch/ Narum to include Site 20 in the inventory at the recommended density of 30 to 40 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 21: Kiewit should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the development area is 50.4 acres with a recommended mixed density of 30 to 40 units per acre for 5 acres and 8 to 14 units per acre for 40 acres with a capacity of 690 units. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to include the site in the inventory.
Councilmember Balch expressed concern regarding the traffic challenges on Valley Drive but believes it should be included in the EIR to determine the infrastructure improvements needed on the east side.
He moved to include Site 21 in the inventory at the mixed density of 30 to 40 units per acre for 5 acres and 8 to 14 units per acre for 40 acres.
Mayor Brown shared the concerns of Councilmember Balch and reiterated the process is being mandated by the State.
Councilmember Arkin expressed concern about the impacts on residents and businesses. She encouraged residents to contact their State Legislators to let them know how they feel about the process. Councilmember Arkin seconded the motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Balch/ Arkin to include Site 21 in the inventory at the mixed density of 30 to 40 units per acre for 5 acres and 8 to 14 units per acre for 40 acres as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
City Council Minutes Page 21 of 27 February 8, 2022
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 22: Merritt should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She reported the site is outside of the City limits and would be proposed for annexation. She advised there is current developer interest. She advised the development area is 45. 59 acres with a recommended density of 2 units per acre with a capacity of 91 units. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to include the site in the inventory.
Mayor Brown noted this is an extremely low density compared to other sites and does not make a dent in the City' s RHNA allocation. She inquired why the Planning Commission went through the Local Agency Formation Commission ( LAFCO) process for only 91 units. Director Clark explained the site has a few constraints since it has freeway proximity at the rear and would require a buffer to reduce noise impacts. She noted a couple of pieces of the site are reserved for the owners. She advised once community amenities and circulation are added the 91 units were the results. She advised the sites are traditional single- family sites and noted the density is in alignment with the General Plan. She clarified the developer is proposing a senior housing project with additional density with some affordable housing.
In response to Councilmember Balch, Director Clark confirmed the project would include frontage improvements to Foothill Road.
Mayor Brown advised this project went to the voters years ago and was rejected because the ingress and egress were on the side streets.
In response to Mayor Brown, Director Clark advised the ingress and egress would be on Foothill Boulevard. She noted access from side streets would be for Electric Vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Director Clark could not recall if Accessory Dwelling Units ADUs) are proposed but noted they are not counted against the density of the project per state law.
She clarified the City cannot restrict the construction of ADUs. Interim City Manager Dolan advised the project as designed does not include ADUs and advised the lots are not large as there are many community amenities included.
Councilmember Testa inquired if potential ADUs would also be age- restricted and requested that information be presented at the next discussion.
Councilmember Narum believes this is a good use for the land taking into account the area. She advised after the project was on the referendum there were lots of meetings and agreements made with the neighbors to keep a large buffer and that is why the lots may look big. She believes this project will fix many problems on Foothill Road. She expressed support for including it in the site inventory and noted she has not received any comments about the site from residents.
Councilmember Narum moved to include Site 21 in the inventory at the recommended density of 2 units per acre.
Mayor Brown advises she cannot support the motion at such a low density. She requested the density be increased to at least 15 units per acre in this last parcel of open space and no impact on the schools.
City Council Minutes Page 22 of 27 February 8, 2022
Councilmember Arkin expressed support for the project and does not believe there is going to be an issue with the ingress/ egress being on Foothill Road. She believes many amenities are being given on this project and believes having some high- end senior housing is a good thing.
In response to Mayor Brown, Interim City Manager Dolan advised the amenities in the project are for the community and not for the public.
Councilmember Arkin recalled there may be a public trail. Interim City Manager Dolan concurred and noted the pool is for residents only.
Councilmember Balch reminded the dais approved Site 1: Lester at 2 units per acre and noted he is having some issues with inconsistency from the dais. He expressed concern regarding Foothill Road' s impact on the high school. He acknowledged the project gives significant improvements to Foothill Road. He expressed support for the project as it is currently outlined.
Mayor Brown reported the units that sell with small lots that are 10 years old now over in The Villages are selling for $ 1. 5 to $ 1.8 million. She noted even a wealthy senior will have trouble affording these large lot homes.
Councilmember Arkin seconded the motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Narum/ Arkin to include Site 22 in the inventory at the recommended density of 2 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 23: Sunol Boulevard Area should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the development area is 23. 89 acres with a recommended density of 30 to 40 units per acre with a capacity of 717 units. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to include the site in the inventory.
Councilmember Balch expressed concern about giving up a site like this one. He inquired if the dais would be willing to restrict the developable area so it could be more of a mixed- use area on a portion of the property so it is not all housing.
In response to Councilmember Arkin, Director Clark reported a letter of support was received from the business owner and an indication of interest from the warehouse owner. Associate Planner Hagen advised the business owner and the warehouse owner were interested in either running it as is or having it be all housing.
Councilmember Arkin expressed support for considering the site for mixed- use but does not believe that needs to be decided at this time. She moved to include Site 23 in the inventory at the recommended density of 30 to 40 units per acre. Councilmember Narum seconded the motion.
Councilmember Narum echoed Councilmember Balch' s comments about trying to balance the RHNA allocation across the community.
Mayor Brown noted there four owners own the five parcels and all of them do not need to be developed at once. She advised the site was close to Pleasanton Middle School, Phoebe Apperson Hearst Elementary, and it is near a transportation area.
City Council Minutes Page 23 of 27 February 8, 2022
MOTION: It was m/s by Arkin/ Narum to include Site 23 in the inventory at the recommended density of 30 to 40 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
In response to Mayor Brown, Director Clark confirmed based on the decisions made at this meeting, there is enough inventory and the City Council may elect to go back and take some off the list.
Mayor Brown' s inquired if the dais wanted to stop or power through the remainder of the agenda. The dais unanimously chose to continue.
Director Clark inquired if Site 24: Sonoma Drive Area should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She reported the site has multiple owners including some vacant parcels. She advised the development area is 6.51 acres with a recommended density of 15 to 25 units per acre with a capacity of 131 units. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to include the site in the inventory.
Councilmember Balch moved to include Site 24 in the inventory at the recommended density of 15 to 25 units per acre. Councilmember Narum seconded the motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Balch/ Narum to include Site 24 in the inventory at the recommended density of 15 to 25 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 27: PUSD- Vineyard should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She reported half of the space is being considered for development with the other half for open space. She advised the development area is 5 acres with a recommended density of 2 units per acre with a capacity of 10 units. PUSD requested the density be increased on the site. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to include the site in the inventory.
Councilmember Testa noted that eliminating PUSD land without a replacement is irresponsible and moved to remove Site 27 from further consideration.
In response to Councilmember Narum, Interim City Manager Dolan reported staff initiated retaining the open space because the Vineyard Specific Plan identifies a site for a community park that is on the old landfill and is very unlikely to ever occur. He advised the Specific Plan envisioned this site as a school and if it is going to be residential, there would be no park in the Vineyard Corridor. He noted staff' s perspective was to give up part of it so there would be a park in the area.
In response to Councilmember Narum, Director Clark advised the density was selected based on the surrounding area but noted it could be bumped up a little bit. She confirmed PUSD would like to increase the density on the portion being rezoned to yield more value from the development.
Councilmember Arkin expressed concern that there will no longer be land for PUSD to build another school. She advised the City tried to help PUSD find suitable land in the northeast area of Pleasanton and could not find a parcel. She advised it is the City' s charge to rezone the land.
City Council Minutes Page 24 of 27 February 8, 2022
In response to Mayor Brown, Councilmember Arkin advised during her tenure on the PUSD board, this site was not chosen because the highest impact was near the Donlon site.
Councilmember Balch explained the City is not giving it up, it is enabling PUSD to have options in his opinion and they will evaluate whether or not to develop the site. He believes PUSD does not have the sites in the right location for their needs.
In response to Councilmember Balch, Interim City Manager Dolan clarified the designated park site in the Vineyard Corridor is the old landfill site and has methane on the site and suspects a park will not be developed there.
Councilmember Balch advised he believes the East Bay Regional Park System across the street with access to Shadow Cliffs provides a community park. He would consider zoning up the site and letting PUSD have choices and evaluate how to serve Pleasanton' s children.
Councilmember Testa advised the City Council is not giving up choices because there are no choices.
She believes eliminating these sites leaves Pleasanton with no future options and leaves the City with mega schools.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Interim City Manager Dolan confirmed this is not the landfill site.
She expressed support for leaving half of the land a park. She advised one of the major reasons it was identified as not being a viable site was because PUSD was reluctant to do boundary changes.
Mayor Brown expressed support for giving PUSD as many options as possible. She advised if the site is rezoned they can certainly retain the property and leave it the way it is although they may have the opportunity to get more money from the sale of this property to purchase another parcel. She expressed appreciation for staff coming up with so many sites. She advised she will support an increase in density to give PUSD options.
Councilmember Narum would like to increase the density to 3 to 5 units per acre.
Councilmember Testa noted her motion was still on the floor. Councilmember Arkin seconded Councilmember Testa' s motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Testa/ Arkin to exclude Site 27 from further consideration as recommended and as noted. Motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Testa
Noes: Councilmembers Balch, Narum, Mayor Brown
Absent: None
Councilmember Narum moved to include Site 27 in the inventory at the recommended increased density of 3 to 5 units per acre and retain 5 acres for open space.
MOTION: It was m/s by Narum/ Balch to include Site 27 in the inventory at the recommended increased density of 3 to 5 units per acre and retain 5 acres for open space as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Balch, Narum, Mayor Brown
Noes: Councilmembers Arkin, Testa
Absent: None
City Council Minutes Page 25 of 27 February 8, 2022
Director Clark inquired if Site 28: Steelwave should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She reported the property owner is recommending a mixed- use development. She advised the development area is 123. 18 acres with a recommended mixed density of 30 units per acre for 8 acres and 8 to 14 units per acre for 118 acres and would provide a capacity of 1,331 units. It was recommended by the Planning Commission to exclude the site in the inventory.
Councilmember Arkin moved to exclude Site 28a and Site 28b to exclude Site 10 from further consideration. Councilmember Testa seconded the motion.
Councilmember Balch strongly recommended including Site 28 in the EIR and advised the City Council is choosing to densify the community if the site is not studied in the EIR. He advised there are many large sites included in the inventory and if any of those do not come to fruition there are not many sites to take their place. He believes it needs to be studied in totality.
Mayor Brown noted that the site is zoned industrial right now and noted the rock quarries have asked for a buffer for safety. She advised it is a perfect location for industrial uses. She believes it is a bad site for development because there is no infrastructure. She advised the cost of building a road from El Charro Road to Stanley Boulevard was estimated to cost $ 100 million. She noted the El Charro Road continuation would go through two drinking water lakes. She advised she cannot support the east side location for anything other than industrial and commercial.
Councilmember Arkin noted it costs $ 100 million to build a new high school. She agreed with Mayor Brown' s comments that affordable housing needs to be near key transportation hubs and has no infrastructure. She agrees the area needs full analysis but cannot support including the site at this time.
Councilmember Balch conceded he is in the minority but believes the site could be a solution should one of those other large sites not be viable. He noted El Charro Road has been identified as a regional transportation road and would like an EIR to review the traffic.
Councilmember Narum would also like to see it be included in the EIR and believes it is worth the review to understand the options. She noted she is not ready to rezone it. She advised a lot of industrial and commercial sites have been eliminated and would like to see a balance between, housing, commercial, retail, and industrial areas.
Mayor Brown advised this site could be used for industrial and commercial.
MOTION: It was m/s by Arkin/ Testa to exclude Site 28a and Site 28b to exclude Site 10 from further consideration as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Testa, Mayor Brown
Noes: Councilmembers Balch, Narum
Absent: None
Director Clark inquired if Site 29: Oracle should remain in the preliminary inventory for further consideration and if there should be any changes to the recommended density range. She advised the development area is 3 acres with a recommended density of 45 to 75 units per acre and would provide a capacity of 135 units. She advised it was recommended by the Planning Commission to exclude the site in the inventory.
Councilmember Narum moved to include Site 29 in the inventory at the recommended increased density of 45 to 75 units per acre. Councilmember Arkin seconded the motion.
City Council Minutes Page 26 of 27 February 8, 2022
MOTION: It was m/s by Narum/ Arkin to include Site 29 in the inventory at the recommended increased density of 45 to 75 units per acre as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Associate Planner Hagen reported with the changes in density she shows a total of 5,040 units which would be 315 units above the 50% buffer and 1, 180 units above the general surplus shortfall. Director Clark concurred with those numbers and advised it gives the City enough overflow capacity in the lower- income units to accommodate the above moderate units. She advised this is enough to move forward with the EIR.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Brown adjourned the regular meeting at 11:34 p.m.
Re. pectful y sub itted,
elyn Kw g
Ci y Clerk
City Council Minutes Page 27 of 27 February 8, 2022