18 ATTACHMENT 09 - Laserfiche WebLink

As a part of this revised development application, Ponderosa proposed to install a new tot-lot and landscape improvements (i.e., turf removal and replacement with groundcover at specified locations) in Valley Trails Park to promote water conservation. The applicant also proposed an "amenities package" that included traffic calming measures/improvements within the Valley Trails Neighborhood. In addition, a community clubhouse was proposed in one of two locations (Lot 37 or Lot 11) as part of an optional development plan. This community clubhouse was proposed in response to the applicant's discussions with VTAG to have a clubhouse with restroom facilities adjacent to or within Valley Trails Park as a part of the applicant's proposed project. Ponderosa proposed to construct the clubhouse, dedicate the land and building to the City, and provide some funding to assist in the City's maintenance costs. Staff expressed support for a clubhouse if construction and maintenance of the facility do not incur any costs to the City. Planning Commission Work Session A Planning Commission Work Session was held for the project on August 31, 2016. The Work Session staff report and excerpts of the minutes are attached to this report as Exhibit D. The Commission discussed the General Plan amendment, clubhouse with bathroom facilities, site layout and access, architecture and design, and a majority expressed general support for the project. A summary of the Work Session discussion is outlined below, along with a description of how each topic was addressed in subsequent project plans. General Plan Amendment and Zoning Staff informed the Commission that when there are inconsistencies between zoning and General Plan land use designations, the General Plan land use designation would govern. The majority of the Planning Commission expressed support for the General Plan amendment to change the land use designation from Public and Institutional to Medium Density Residential, but there was not consensus on this issue. The Planning Commission commented that a single- family residential development is an appropriate use for the site and that other uses, such as high density residential development or a public and institutional use, would likely generate more impacts on the neighborhood. However, the Commission expressed concerns over the loss of Public and Institutional land, the impacts that the project could have on the schools serving the site, and the timing of the General Plan amendment, since the City has already met its Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA). Zoning It was noted in the Work Session staff report and meeting that Ponderosa intended to revise the development plans such that all of the R-1-6,500 Zoning District development standards would be met prior to returning to the Planning Commission for a formal recommendation to the City Council. Since Ponderosa's intent at the time was to meet all of the development standards of the R-1-6,500 District, the project was presented at the Work Session as if it were a subdivision that conformed to the underlying zoning district and would not require rezoning. Although the number of proposed homes was reduced from 37 to 36, the applicant found that significant site plan changes would be necessary in order to adhere to all of the development standards of the R-1-6,500 District. Therefore, the applicant is proposing to rezone the site to a PUD district to allow for variations in the development standards that cannot be met (i.e., minimum corner lot widths, front and rear yard setbacks, and building-to-building separation requirements). Staffs analysis pertaining to the rezoning is discussed in the Analysis section of this report. P16-1386, P17-0155, PUD-113, & TRACT 8259; 6900 Valley Trails Drive Planning Commission 5 of 32 . - . • �al