ITEM 23 ATTACHMENT 7 - PC Agenda Report

P22-1089, PUD-147 and Tract 8522, Merritt Planning Commission 31 of 33 • No fee credits are to be provided to the applicant for the proposed Foothill Road bike and pedestrian improvements or the Marilyn Murphy Kane trail extension improvements • Construction and annual maintenance, in perpetuity, of the Marilyn Murphy Kane trail extension as follows: o Substantially complete to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to issuance of 50th home building permit, or within 4 years of issuance of first building permit, whichever comes first • Construction of Foothill Road bike and pedestrian improvements beyond the project frontage as follows: o improvements to allow for safe ingress/egress to the site from Foothill Road, including roadway widening and creation of the required left-term pocket and other related improvements necessary in determination of the City Traffic Engineer, to be installed prior to issuance of first Certificate of Occupancy. Other Foothill Road bike and pedestrian improvements to be “substantially complete” to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer, prior to issuance of 50th home building permit, or within 4 years of issuance of first building permit, whichever comes first. • A Public Safety facility and equipment contribution to the City in the amount of $1 million to be paid as follows: o $200,000 to be paid at first building permit; $400,000 at time of issuance of 50th home’s building permit; and $400,000 at Building Permit for the 100th home building permit Based on these terms staff has determined the City will receive at least equitable financial and other public benefits over the initial term of the DA, compared to the value of terms that are to the benefit of the developer, that leads staff to recommend support of the draft DA. In particular, the City would secure additional multimodal improvements along Foothill Boulevard and within the project in the form of a trail extension, would receive a direct financial contribution in the amount of $1 Million to support provision of needed public safety improvements and equipment, and would also receive payment of Capital Facilities and Transportation Impact Fees to help offset the demands created on City facilities by the incremental addition of new residents to the City. Finally, although on-site affordable housing is a goal of the IZO, staff recognizes that the existing ordinance permits payment of fees, and so achieving on-site units is a positive benefit of the project. Accordingly, staff recommends the Planning Commission make a recommendation of support for the draft DA to the City Council. Staff notes, the DA process requires the City Council to determine if a DA is consistent with the General Plan. Based on the information above, staff believes the City Council will be able to make this finding. Annexation The project site is designated as Site 22 in the City’s Housing Element. The project site is located just outside of the City limits but within Pleasanton’s Sphere of Influence (SOI) and Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). Prior to development of the proposed project, the project site would need to be annexed into the City of Pleasanton, and a segment of Foothill Road in Alameda County abutting the project site, consistent with City and LAFCO policies as well as Program 1.10 of the Housing Element. Annexation of the project site and adjacent right of way would represent a logical and orderly extension of urban growth and the City’s boundaries, which would ensure the project site would be developed in a comprehensive and thoughtful manner consistent with other nearby lands. Moreover, as the City processes development