|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Livermore Planning Commission extended its support at last week’s meeting for the project entitlements of a 13-unit multi-family, townhome-style development.
Proposed for construction at the southeast corner of East Avenue and Dolores Street, the approximately 0.62-acre site is currently occupied by a single-family home. Applicant and owner Frank Abboud proposes to demolish this home to make way for the two-story development of attached rental units and one attached accessory dwelling unit.
Units will range in size from three to four bedrooms, approximately 1,400 to 1,900 square feet each, according to a staff report prepared by city of Livermore associate planner Kam Purewal. One unit will be priced for a very-low-income household, considered to be 50% of the area median income.
Each unit will have an attached two-car garage and there will be four guest spaces onsite, including one accessible space.
In addition to building new homes, the project will also involve reconstructing the curb, gutter and sidewalk along the project frontages of East Avenue and Dolores Street, undergrounding all utilities and constructing a new shared driveway to access the site from Dolores Street.
As part of the project, the applicant agreed to contribute $50,000 toward intersection improvements at East Avenue and Dolores Street. These improvements, potentially including permanent traffic-calming measures or bike and pedestrian enhancements, will be completed at a later date as part of a capital improvement project.
While garnering support from the majority of the commissioners at their June 17 meeting, Commissioner Jacob Anderson expressed concern about a perceived conflict between the proposed project and the city’s Active Transportation Plan, a document that guides decisions surrounding pedestrian and bicycle facilities. In Anderson’s perspective, there is not enough space along East Avenue to achieve ATP goals like the creation of buffered bike lanes, unless parking were eliminated in certain areas. Out of concern, Anderson inquired about acquiring right-of-way from the project site to create the buffered bike lanes.
But according to city senior civil engineer Debbie Salgado, the city cannot require the developer to provide a right-of-way for additional space along East Avenue due to the ongoing nature of a relevant study called the East Avenue Corridor Study.
“We want in-fill development in our community to look this good,” Salgado added.
During the meeting, there were no public comments regarding the proposal. But prior to its kick-off, staff received two comments set for presentation the following day.
Maddisan Ann Drossulis, a neighbor of the project site, submitted questions regarding the supply of parking, further suggesting that parking will overflow into the surrounding streets. She also suggested converting the garages to parking ports to ensure the spaces are used for vehicles rather than storage. Additional questions include neighborhood entrances and exits and housing affordability.
As for parking on Dolores Street, four to five spaces would be lost, staff confirmed.
Assuming an additional four to five spaces lost on East Avenue, Vice Chair Tracy Kronzak said the neighborhood will be adding a net total of approximately 30 parking spaces.
A second comment came from the California Housing Defense Fund, wherein officials expressed support for the project. This nonprofit corporation advocates for increased access to housing for Californians at all income levels.
“The design is absolutely amazing,” Anderson said during the meeting. “It utilizes the space very well. It keeps it very similar to the surrounding neighborhood, but without it seeming old or stuffy.”
While in favor of the project design, Anderson also expressed concern regarding limited space on East Avenue to fit buffered bike lanes.
The ATP calls for these buffered bike lanes on East Avenue, Anderson said.
“I’m really seeing an issue here of being able to try to fit everything in,” Anderson said. “So, if we’re not getting extra space, then we’re definitely going to be eliminating something in the future.”
“The math ain’t mathin’,” Anderson added. “There’s not necessarily enough space to actually do what our ATP says it needs to do.”
According to the ongoing East Avenue Corridor Study, staff concluded that the right-of-way can accommodate any future needs for buffered bike lanes by either reconfiguring the lanes or eliminating parking, Salgado said. Lane reconfiguration could mean removal, but that would require further studies.
Since the city has not decided which route to take, it can not require the developer to provide a right-of-way, Salgado explained.
Based on the level of service in the area, Anderson considered the elimination of a lane to be unlikely.
Salgado also expressed her willingness to amend the motion before the commission.
“My preference would not be to add a friendly amendment because it seems like we’re unfairly burdening a project with a requirement that relies on the city,” Chairperson Yolanda Fintschenko said.
The commissioners agreed 4-1 to recommend that the Livermore City Council approve project entitlements including its planned development, tentative parcel map and site plan design review. Anderson cast the sole dissenting vote.
As a proposed in-fill development, the planning commission also recommended that council find the project categorically exempt under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act.
The council is set to consider approving the project this fall.
