Laserfiche WebLink
ATTACHMENT 2 <br /> THE CITY OF <br /> "' CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT <br /> pL EASANTON. <br /> May 21, 2013 <br /> Community Development <br /> Planning Division <br /> TITLE: CONSIDER APPLICATIONS FOR: (1) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT <br /> PLAN (PUD-81-30-87D) TO CONSTRUCT 168 APARTMENT UNITS, <br /> AND RELATED SITE IMPROVEMENT AT 5729 WEST LAS POSITAS <br /> BOULEVARD; (2) AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGREEMENT; AND (3) <br /> GROWTH MANAGEMENT APPROVAL. <br /> SUMMARY <br /> The applications are for a high-density residential development consisting of 168 <br /> apartment units and related parking, community facilities and other related site <br /> improvements on a site on West Las Positas Boulevard east of Tassajara Creek and <br /> south-west of Stoneridge Drive in Hacienda. Related land use entitlements include an <br /> affordable housing agreement and a growth management agreement. <br /> HOUSING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION <br /> On May 2, 2013, the Housing Commission approved an Affordable Housing Agreement <br /> as described in Attachment 2. <br /> PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION <br /> On May 8, 2013, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the PUD <br /> development plan application (4-0-1 with Narum abstaining) subject to the conditions <br /> shown in Exhibit A of the Planning Commission report with amendments made at the <br /> Planning Commission meeting. <br /> RECOMMENDATION <br /> 1. Find that the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 have not <br /> occurred as described in the Addendum to the SEIR and find that the previously <br /> prepared SEIR, including the adopted CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding <br /> Considerations, and the Addendum to the SEIR are adequate to serve as the <br /> environmental documentation for this project and satisfy all the requirements of <br /> CEQA; <br /> 2. Find that the proposed PUD development plan and development agreement are <br /> consistent with the General Plan; <br /> 3. Make the PUD findings for the proposed development plan as stated in the April 24, <br /> 2013, Planning Commission staff report (pages 26-28 in Attachment 7); <br />