PC 02/12/97 - Laserfiche WebLink

The landscape plan is very conceptual in terms of exact tree and shrub placement. Staff feels the conceptual plan is generally appropriate in terms of placement, species, and apparent quantity. Staff has added its standard condition requiring a detailed landscape and irrigation plan prior to approval any final map. Masonry block soundwalls are required to ensure that noise levels within the development are kept as low as possible. The freeway soundwall would be about 16 feet high and would wrap around the east side of the project site at a height of 12 feet. From there, the soundwall decreases in height to 8 feet along all of Street A and Stoneridge Drive to the Arroyo Mocho bridge. Eight foot high masonry block walls will be installed along the rear property lines of the homes on Vermont Place and along the EVA. Eight foot high wood good neighbor property line fences are proposed between the single-family lots. Staff feels the developer has taken efforts to design the proposed residential project to address the concerns the neighbors have raised at various neighborhood meetings. The street pattern, lotting pattern, landscaping, and wall treatment in some areas was determined through neighborhood input. Staff notes that the developer's efforts have reduced some of the controversy surrounding the Specific Plan Amendment and the PUD plan. Nevertheless, staff notes that not all neighbors are satisfied with the proposed plan or the proposal for affordable living units. Staff feels the proposed plan is appropriate for the area and that the project has been designed generally in accordance with the City's General Plan policies and procedures and to City standards. Therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of Case PUD-96-02. Commissioner Lutz asked Counsel about the "compensable taking of CalMat land." Mr. Beougher had not read the letter and was unable to address the question. Commissioner Cooper inquired about Dublin's correspondence. Dublin commented on the original EIR. Mr. Iserson stated Dublin wants this project to pay for the El Charro interchange expenses up to the year 2010. Staff does not agree that Pleasanton should pay more than its fair share to accommodate Dublin's expansion plan. Chair Barker is opposed to calling this development design neo-traditional because there is a front porch and the house is moved closer to the street. Mr. Iserson stated that they are not representing this as a neo-traditional project. Chair Barker inquired if the developer didn't build the 80 affordable units, how much would they contribute in fees. Scott Erickson noted that the fee is $2,000 per unit. Beougher stated that if the developer provides 15 % affordable units, they do not have to pay in-lieu fees. Chair Barker inquired if the Commission can add conditions related to project phasing. Ms. Watt stated they could, and there is a condition from staff that they be given a complete phasing plan at the time of the tentative map approval. Commissioners Wright, Lutz, and Cooper advised that they had met or talked with the applicants. PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Planning Commission Minutes Page 21 February 12, 1997