CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PACKET - Laserfiche WebLink

Page 10 of 12 community through payment of the fee, versus requiring construction of the units on-site.” Staff further notes that allowing the project to partially “fee out” of its inclusionary requirement would reduce the yield of affordable units to be counted toward the City’s RHNA, notwithstanding the potential that the fees generated could support production of these units elsewhere in the city, albeit potentially over a much longer-term, since such project would need to be located, entitled and constructed in order to yield the offsite units. Gated Community The applicant’s preferred plan includes controlled access to the age-restricted community in the southeast quadrant of the site, with a perimeter gate restricting access to residents and their guests. Access to amenities in this area, including the park, would be similarly restricted. The applicant has indicated that controlled access to the age-restricted community is necessary for security and privacy and the marketability of age-restricted units. Staff requests City Council feedback on whether the City should permit controlled access to the age-restricted area of the project. The City’s General Plan Circulation Element Program 7.4 calls for the City to “discourage new gated communities” and Community Character Element Program 17.1 calls for “neighborhoods open and accessible to one another.” Staff notes that the City has recently approved gated senior communities, including the 111-unit Merrit project on Foothill Boulevard. Staff also notes that the applicant's preferred plan includes a perimeter gate for only a portion of the project sites, whereas the County proposal restricts access to the entire development. Nonetheless, allowing any portion of the project to be gated does go against the General Plan policy, and to some degree presents the same issues and concerns about connectivity and integration into the broader neighborhood as were previously cited for the County (senior only) project. Other Issues As noted above, the applicant intends to submit a formal East Lakes application within the next two-three months. This application will establish a project description for the EIR and will be the project reviewed and analyzed by staff. Given this, staff requests City Council feedback on any other issues the Council considers important to the high-level project concept. This may include issues related to site access, circulation, open space, recreational amenities, landscaping, and home design. City staff and the applicant will use this feedback to help guide further revisions and details added to the proposed project. Summary of Requested City Council Input and Recommendations Staff requests City Council feedback on the following items; where staff also has a related recommendation, it is noted below: 1. Should the applicant’s application include residential uses in the Livermore Airport Protection Area? Staff recommendation: The proposed project should include residential uses in the APA, with further analysis to be prepared during the City’s project review to allow the City Council to determine if findings for override of an ALUC non-compliance determination can be made. 2. What should be the maximum total number of units in the applicant’s preferred plan? Page 333 of 348