PC 061108 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Williamson continued to say that the City Attorney argued that the PUD and design review were different and that a PUD was not required to undergo a design review. He noted that was not clear in 1985 and had seen PUD's that were expected to go through a design review. Based on the staff's comparison spreadsheet as well as the one he had provided, he stated that he believed that due to the cumulative effect, the assumptions made in the 1985 studies regarding traffic, parking, and environmental were no longer valid and should be revisited. He noted that rights should be given to the residents to say whether the project fit in the neighborhood due to the changing dynamics in the community. He argued that the cumulative effect went well beyond the gray area of substantial conformance and requested that the Commission rule in favor of substantial nonconformance. Valerie Rossman noted that she had been a teacher in Pleasanton for many years and had originally supported the concept of a senior center but was very concerned about the immense size of the proposed building. She understood there would have been no way for her to see the plans in the first place and was very concerned about that. She noted that the Sunrise representative gave an emotional appeal regarding the interior of the building; the plans seem to indicate that they would be up against a large institutional building at four stories. She stated that this proposal should not ignore the change in the community's makeup and added that she taught about the elements of the community of character, including responsibility in how Pleasanton would be built up. Jack Dove noted that he was a former Planning Commissioner and that he believed it was time to address the lack of assisted living in Pleasanton. He noted that a survey of over 50 establishments in Northern California concluded that it was important to know what percentage of assisted-living residents were from the area. He noted that 80 percent of the residents in each establishment were from out of the area. He noted that because of the updated State requirements, any new building would be in very good shape with respect to earthquake safety and that evacuation from the third floor would not be as much of an issue as it would have been 23 years ago. With respect to parking, he stated that there would be 200 parking spaces which would be sufficient for this use. In the facilities he had visited, the staff-to-Alzheimer's-patient ratio was approximately two to one. Jennifer Robinson noted that she had family experience in such facilities. She added that it was very difficult to find a site in Pleasanton to meet this need. She opposed the size of the structure and understood that three stories had not been good enough for the applicants, leading them to design afour-story building. She believed they would comply with three stories. She stated that she believed none of the neighbors wanted anything to be built on that site. She supported having the facility near a park facility where there were children would be an important part of the quality of life of the seniors and the children and that it would improve their lives. She supported the placement of the facility near the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 11, 2008 Page 20 of 28