Sunset Development presents ‘Canopy’ at Bishop Ranch 8: 412 homes, 157-unit affordable building, commissioners press on parking, density and inclusionary plan

San Ramon Planning Commission Chair Jean Kuzyk opened a study session on the Canopy at Bishop Ranch 8 redevelopment, a proposal to demolish three office buildings and build 412 homes—including 255 for‑sale single‑family homes and a 157‑unit affordable rental building—on a roughly 27‑acre site at 12000 Executive Parkway.

The project team, representing Sunset Development, described Canopy as a walkable neighborhood that would link to CityWalk, Bartlett Pear Park and the Iron Horse Trail. Stephanie Hill, project representative for Sunset Development, said the plans include "a range of housing options, both rental and ownership market rate and affordable to attract a diverse mix of households to Downtown San Ramon." The multifamily affordable building would be developed by Eden Housing.

Why it matters: The proposal occupies a large site in the city’s downtown mixed‑use north zoning area and would add hundreds of homes as the Bishop Ranch campus transitions from office to residential uses. Commissioners focused on whether the project’s parking, vehicle access and proposed method of meeting the city’s inclusionary housing requirements are adequate and legally consistent.

What the proposal includes - Site: approximately 27 acres in the DMU North (Downtown Mixed Use North) planning area; applicant materials show a large central greenbelt and pedestrian connections to nearby parks and the Iron Horse Trail. Landscape architect Ezekiel Bed described a community greenbelt “approximately 2.9 acres in size” with play areas, seating and bioswale/biofiltration features along Executive Parkway to treat stormwater and buffer noise. - Units: 412 total homes: 255 detached for‑sale single‑family houses, and a 157‑unit affordable rental building (five stories) proposed at the corner of Bishop Drive and Executive Parkway. The single‑family homes would include multiple village groupings, with units ranging roughly from 1,800 to 3,043 square feet and some plans offering on‑site ADU/JADU options, garages and private yards. - Parking and density: The multifamily component was presented with 135 parking spaces for 157 units (applicant using a state density bonus parking reduction), and the applicant stated a project‑wide average density figure of roughly 20.6 units per acre. Commissioners computed subarea densities differently during the discussion (one commissioner noted ~79.8 dwelling units per acre for the multifamily portion). - Affordable housing: Eden Housing presented as the affordable‑housing developer. Dixie Bouse of Eden Housing said the organization has "started working on the financing" and was "hopeful…we're under construction next year with a 24‑month schedule" if tax‑credit financing is secured. Eden’s proposal would locate all required inclusionary units in the separate multifamily building and the applicant intends to use an alternate compliance approach under the city’s inclusionary housing ordinance (land dedication and an off‑site concentration of affordable units).

Commissioners' key feedback and staff clarifications - Inclusionary housing and land dedication: Commissioners pressed whether the city's inclusionary housing ordinance allows the developer to meet the project's on‑site requirement by concentrating required units on a separate parcel (land dedication to Eden Housing). Staff said the proposal is being reviewed as an alternate means of compliance and that the city’s discretionary review would apply. Commissioners raised statutory and ordinance concerns: one commissioner explicitly referenced the city ordinance sections and California Government Code 65915(p)(1) in relation to parking and density bonus rules and questioned whether moving all affordable units into one building satisfies the ordinance’s goals of dispersal and unit comparability. - Parking and state density bonus: Commissioners and members of the public questioned the reduced parking ratios. Staff and the applicant noted the multifamily component uses parking reductions available under the state density bonus program and the proposal includes dispersed surface stalls within the residential community. Eden said affordable communities often show lower vehicle ownership and are studying additional parking options (such as expanding parking within the podium). - Vehicular access and traffic: Commissioners asked why the design does not include a separate access onto Bishop Drive. The applicant said two aligned entrances on Executive Parkway were selected to form an internal loop street, to align with future development across Executive Parkway and to avoid adding turning movements to Bishop Drive where a curved alignment can encourage higher speeds. Commissioners asked that the upcoming traffic study examine the two new neighborhoods and the Bishop/Executive intersection in detail. - Site design, massing and open space: Architects described the multifamily massing, stepped courtyards and breezeway moments intended to relate to the single‑family scale. The landscape team emphasized a deep 80‑foot Executive Parkway buffer with bioretention and canopy trees. Commissioners and public commenters urged softer materials and color palettes, more pedestrian connections, greater integration of affordable units throughout the project rather than concentrating them on one parcel, and mitigation to reduce the perceived scale of a curved parking wall along Bishop Drive. - Timing and coordination: The applicant said market‑rate vertical construction typically begins about two years after approvals with a 3–4 year absorption period. Eden indicated its multifamily timetable depends on securing tax‑credit rounds but estimated 18–22 months construction once vertical work begins and said site horizontal work by the market‑rate builder could be coordinated to allow Eden to go vertical when their financing is secured.

Public comment highlights - Pamela Wallace and other residents asked the commission to consider vehicle ownership demographics (multigenerational households) when evaluating reduced parking and urged the city to assess cumulative traffic impacts from multiple Bishop Ranch developments. - Other members of the public urged higher walkability and mixed‑use features, discouraged segregating affordable units into one building and recommended more varied architecture and richer landscaping.

Action/next steps This item was a study session; the applications are not yet complete and no formal decisions were made. Staff will continue technical review, including traffic and parking analyses, inclusionary housing compliance and ARB (Architectural Review Board) review. The commission requested more data on parcel‑level densities, parking justification studies, and a legal/ordinance analysis of the proposed land dedication approach to meeting the inclusionary requirement.

Ending note Developers and staff said they will return with refined plans, technical studies and responses to the commission's feedback as the application proceeds through completeness review and subsequent hearings.

Quotes (selected) "A central goal is to support a range of housing options, both rental and ownership market rate and affordable to attract a diverse mix of households to Downtown San Ramon," Stephanie Hill, project representative for Sunset Development. "We're hopeful…we're under construction next year with a 24‑month schedule," Dixie Bouse, Eden Housing (on the affordable building financing and construction timing). "This green below includes both passive and active use areas for all age groups…" Ezekiel Bed, landscape architect (on the approximately 2.9‑acre greenbelt).