CCMIN080613SP - Laserfiche WebLink

Bob Russman, Congregation Beth Emek, shared safety pedestrian safety concerns related to the lack of crosswalk access between Nevada Court and the proposed retail development as well as overgrown vegetation that impairs the view of cross traffic when looking right from Nevada Court. He also expressed concern over the proposed dog run, which staff is recommending be located adjacent to the congregation's outdoor courtyard which hosts many functions throughout the year. He suggested that the applicant work with East Bay Regional Parks to use a portion of its land adjacent to the rear of the project site as an alternative location. Councilmember Brown asked and Mr. Tassano confirmed that the driveway entrance from Nevada Street to the project site is both ingress and egress. Vice-Mayor Cook-Kallio asked and Mr. Tassano agreed to install a crosswalk from Nevada Court to the project site. Pat Costanza Jr., Kewit Properties, said the applicant has assembled a first class team of consultants, many of whom he has worked with over the past 20 years, and that he fully supports the project as a Pleasanton resident. He referred to a letter received by the Council from Kewit which reminded the Council of Kewit's request that this project, if ever approved, pay its fair share of the El Charro extension. Mayor Thorne asked what flexibility the Council has in allocating Traffic Impact fees. Mr. Fialho said the fees may be allocated to the list of projects identified, which will eventually include the El Charro extension and underpass. He stressed that such an allocation should not be conditioned through this project, but rather evaluated in the context of the East Pleasanton Specific Plan. Mayor Thorne closed the public hearing. Vice-Mayor Cook-Kallio acknowledged that the total numbers of affordable housing units considered with these projects are really very small, but stressed that they provide an important opportunity for those looking to start their lives in Pleasanton or remain near family as they age. She recognized the cost in perpetuity of affordable housing and shared her appreciation for the developer's effort to honor the IZO even in light of the Palmer case. She said she would prefer to see actual units built but that if the city were to exercise the in lieu fee option, she would not support diverting those funds to anything other than affordable housing. She said she was sympathetic to Mr. Priscaro's concerns but said the simple truth is that the city cannot control its growth the way it might like and must deal with what comes. She said she was particularly concerned with the completion of El Charro and, where possible, would like to see traffic impact fees earmarked for the project with some flexibility. She said she would like to include some language acknowledging what Mr. Pringle discussed, which is that a portion of those fees collected from this project be used to offset the El Charro connection if built. She also expressed concerns with the lack of a safe connection from the Iron Horse Trail across Valley Avenue, though acknowledged that it is not the responsibility of this developer. She asked that staff consider some interim improvements, such as moving the barricade further west and perhaps planting some vegetation to discourage cyclists from crossing through there, to increase safety until the trail is improved as part of the East Pleasanton Specific Plan. Councilmember Pentin described this as a smart and well designed project, particularly for this portion of Pleasanton. However, he expressed concerns with the Affordable Housing Agreement and said he would be extremely disappointed to lose the 3 dedicated accessible units if the city were to opt for the in lieu fee alternative. Mr. Pringle assured him that the entire project would be ADA compliant and also agreed to retain the 3 special units regardless of which option the city chooses to exercise. He noted that in their older existing City Council Minutes Page 7 of 10 August 6,2013