CCMIN082096 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Michelotti and staff discussed the number of units the General Plan allows on a 1.43 acre parcel. She commented this is an infill project downtown, and one objective for providing housing near downtown is for people to enjoy the downtown areas without having to drive. The applicants based their density on the old General Plan since this project has been worked on by staff for over six months. The parking concerns are legitimate but staff will be able to work something out with the applicants. The project is a good infill project that is not at the maximum density. Further, the trail improvement is a good amenity for the City. Ms. Mohr commented the trail improvement opens an access on private property that currently does not exist. Access to the creek is a major concern--her neighbors complain they walk 3/4 of a mile for access to the creek even though they back up to it. She has learned that the motorcourt type neighborhood is very desirable to some people; they have a single detached home with very little maintenance. The neo-traditional type homes are homes on smaller lots than what is typical for Pleasanton. Ms. Mohr would like to see this type of project go in, and liked the project well enough to suppert it. It was moved by Ms. Miehelotti, seconded by/Ms. Mohr, finding that the proposed project will not have a significant environmental impact and that a resolution approving the proposed Negative Declaration be adopted; making the PUD findings for the proposed PUD development plan; introducing the ordinance rezoning the subject property from the A-Agriculture District to the PUD (Planned Unit Development) - MDR (Medium Density Residential); and approving the development plan subject to the conditions of approval included in Exhibit B. Mr. Tarver has concern with the parking in the project; however, his issues are broader than this 1.43 acre site. Growth Management is at capacity to 1999 at this time. It is difficult for him to keep talking about the General Plan and the policies and procedures that were unanimously adopted and then to throw it all out when the a project comes along that doesn't follow them. The City should follow the policy that says to follow the midpoint of the density ranges. The growth management has backlog problems and in that houses approved now will not be built for five years. In five years' time, there may be issues that would not allow the approval of the project if considered at that time. There are so many issues that need to be worked out now, people should stop requesting development plans until the backlog is worked through. He has concerns and can't support even an eleven-unit project because of larger scale issues. Ms. Michelotti felt that if Mr. Tarver won't support this project, it is only fair to continue this application until there are five Council members present. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers - Michelotti and Mohr NOES: Councilmember Pico and Mayor Tarver ABSENT: Councilmember Dennis ABSTAIN: None Ms. Mohr commented that she heard the Mayor talking around a building moratorium. 08/20/96 - 15-