My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
18
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2017
>
050217
>
18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/8/2017 4:14:35 PM
Creation date
4/27/2017 10:20:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
5/2/2017
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
18
Document Relationships
18 ATTACHMENT 08
(Attachment)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2017\050217
18 ATTACHMENT 09
(Attachment)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2017\050217
18 ATTACHMENT 12
(Attachment)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2017\050217
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
155
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
0 a valid Certificate of Liability Insurance certificate naming the City and <br /> Ponderosa's Homeowners Association as additional insureds. <br /> • Responsibility for scheduling the use of the clubhouse would be determined by the <br /> Use Agreement. However, the City would not be responsible for any damage to the <br /> clubhouse that may occur as a result of the use of the clubhouse by the Valley Trails <br /> Residents. <br /> • Ponderosa's Homeowners Association will be required to indemnify and hold the City <br /> harmless for any administrative, legal or equitable actions arising out of the use of the <br /> clubhouse by the Valley Trails Residents. <br /> The development agreement has a 10-year term. The developer would be obligated to pay <br /> the applicable development impact fees which are in effect when the ordinance approving the <br /> agreement is effective. As set forth in Section 4.1 of the development agreement, the <br /> developer will pay development impacts fees at the rate in place when building permits are <br /> obtained (as such fees are subject to regular cost-of-living adjustments), but the project <br /> would not be subject to new impact fees which were not in place when the development <br /> agreement goes into effect. The agreement also ensures that the developer will abide by all <br /> requirements of the approved affordable housing agreement. The draft development <br /> agreement is included in Attachment 4. <br /> Growth Management Agreement <br /> The City's Growth Management Ordinance (GMO) regulates the number of residential <br /> building permits that can be issued each year to assure a predictable growth rate while <br /> providing housing and currently allows a total of 235 Growth Management Unit Allocations <br /> (GMUAs) to be issued per year. To date in 2017, a total of 59 GMUAs have been issued. <br /> The proposed development would require 36 GMUAs. In recognition of the desire for <br /> metered growth in the community and consistent with the applicant's desired construction <br /> schedule, the Growth Management Agreement would grant 18 GMUAs in 2018 and 18 <br /> GMUAs in 2019. If the Council approves the requested GMUAs, a total of 77 GMUAs would <br /> be issued to-date this calendar year, below the allocation limit. The Growth Management <br /> Agreement for the project is included as Attachment 7. <br /> HOUSING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION <br /> On November 11, 2016, the Housing Commission passed a motion recommending that the <br /> City Council approve an alternative fee proposal for affordable housing which would require <br /> the applicant to pay $948,013 in affordable housing fees at the time of building permit <br /> issuance. Please see the attached Housing Commission staff reports and meeting minutes <br /> in Exhibit H of Attachment 9 for additional details and discussion. <br /> PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION <br /> The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 12, 2017 to review the proposed <br /> project and receive public comments. The staff report and excerpt of the draft minutes from <br /> this meeting are provided in Attachments 9 and 11. By a 3-2 vote (Commissioners Allen and <br /> O'Conner opposed), the Planning Commission recommended approval of the project with the <br /> following revisions to the staff-recommended conditions: <br /> • No. 7 - require architectural details on all four sides of the clubhouse building; <br /> Page 18 of 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.