Laserfiche WebLink
subject to staff's recommended conditions with modifications requiring the applicant <br />work with staff to: investigate the feasibility of installing retaining walls along the rear <br />property lines of Lots 10-13 and 16-17 in order to eliminate the 2:1 slope bank in the <br />rear yards and maximize the flat, usable space; investigate the feasibility of including <br />sidewalks on both sides of the street by reducing the street width; and determine an <br />acceptable stormwater treatment plan for the project. Since the Planning Commission <br />hearing, the applicant has been working with staff to address these conditions. For <br />example, the applicant will provide sidewalks on both sides of the street by narrowing <br />the street width to 32 feet and the applicant is redesigning the stormwater treatment <br />plan to substitute pervious street pavement for the media filtration vaults (i.e., oil/water <br />separators). <br />DISCUSSION <br />Staff analysis indicates that the proposed density, site plan, and size, design, and <br />positioning of the buildings are appropriate for the subject site. The applicant will be <br />required to mitigate traffic impacts created by the project through the payment of traffic <br />fees. The project will also provide for-sale single-family homes for seniors, which is a <br />housing type not currently provided in the City. A detailed analysis and discussion of <br />the proposal is included in the Planning Commission staff report dated June 25, 2008, <br />including: the Planning Commission Workshop; land use including General Plan <br />conformity, zoning and uses, disclosures, and age restrictions; traffic and circulation <br />including gated development, trails, and vehicle restrictions on private streets; parking; <br />noise; grading and drainage; geotechnical study; building design; site development <br />standards; adjacent neighbor concerns; affordable housing; Green Building; common <br />and private open space; and landscaping and fencing. This report includes <br />supplemental discussion regarding traffic and circulation, the East Pleasanton Specific <br />Plan, affordable housing, and trail connections. <br />Traffic and Circulation <br />Adding traffic onto Valley Avenue has been the most frequent concern expressed by <br />Pleasanton residents regarding the proposed project. A traffic study was conducted for <br />this project which indicates that the traffic from the proposed project would not result in <br />any intersection exceeding the City's LOS D or better standard. The Santa Rita <br />Road/Valley Avenue intersection will not meet the LOS D or better standard in the PM <br />peak hour with the existing traffic plus traffic from approved but not yet built projects. <br />The proposed project would add a small amount of traffic to the Santa Rita Road/Valley <br />Avenue intersection (19 AM peak hour trips and 27 PM peak hour trips), increasing the <br />average delay by 1.6 seconds, but not resulting in a change to the LOS at this <br />intersection in both the AM and PM peak hours. The construction of a third southbound <br />left-turn lane at this intersection will allow it to operate at LOS D in the PM peak hour, <br />but the City is also exploring other mitigations for this intersection. The traffic mitigation <br />for this intersection is considered to be a Citywide responsibility and is discussed in the <br />Draft General Plan. Specifically, Program 2.3 indicates: <br />Exempt conditionally the Santa Rita RoadNalley Avenue intersection from the City's LOS <br />D standard in that the mitigation of adding a third southbound left turn lane is a short-term <br />Page 6 of 13 <br />