CCMIN021709 - Laserfiche WebLink

Councilmember Sullivan confirmed that the analysis includes the extension of Stoneridge Drive and asked if it studies the widening of SR 84. Mr. Tassano explained that future traffic models only anticipate what is foreseeable and currently funded so would not address the four lane section he assumes Mr. Sullivan was referring to. Councilmember Sullivan asked what the site's 2002 PUD approval says in reference to this particular site and project. Mr. Roush explained that it only indicates that if the school is not developed on the site, it could be developed as medium density residential senior housing units. There is no verbiage indicating the number of units allowed or the timing of any planning process. Councilmember Sullivan asked if the existing condition could essentially continue in perpetuity. Mr. Roush was unsure of the potential for perpetuity but did note that there was not any express cutoff date for planning approval. Councilmember Sullivan said that this looks like a great project with extensive green building efforts. Despite that and the community's desire for such a project, he believes the need for affordable housing is greater. The only way to accomplish that with any significance is through a high density housing project that focuses on transit oriented development. He cautioned that approval of developments like this whittle away the opportunity to do so and the timing of this project would be more suitable following the completion of more pressing matters like the Stoneridge Drive extension, regional traffic improvements, and development of the East Pleasanton Specific Plan. Councilmember McGovern said that she fully supports thie concept of single-family, medium priced, for-sale senior housing but is concerned with this project's density, FARs, and proximity to the OSC firing range. She cited examples of three proposed lots which abut five or more other homes and suggested that the developer could have; taken better advantage of the lake and trail areas it abuts. She said that many seniors will fired themselves living off the equity in their current homes, questioned the HOA fees estimated by the applicants, and doubted the affordability of the homes, associated dues, and property taxes given the current economy. She questioned the application of General Plan Program 2.8 and whether or not the public would support overriding the current General Plan Policy 2 of the Circulation Element Program 2.5 which states that the City will "require whatever mitigation measures are necessary, including the withholding of building permits, to return intersections to acceptable levels in the event that LOS A is exceeded." Motion: It was m/s by HostermanlThorne to adopt Ordinance No. 1987 approving PUD-74 with the recommendations set forth by staff and Council. Motion passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Cook-Kallio, Thorne, Mayor Hosterman Noes: Councilmembers McGovern and Sullivan Absent: None City Council Minutes Page 16 of 19 February 17, 2009