Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stardust Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission forwards Stardust subdivision and development agreement to council after unanimous votes
Summary
The commission unanimously recommended City Council approve an addendum to the Village One EIR, large‑lot and small‑lot tentative maps, and a 20‑year development agreement for the 77‑acre Stardust project by Beazer Homes, which would create 302 residential lots and around 20 acres of open space.
The Planning Commission on June 19 voted unanimously to recommend City Council approve a set of entitlements for the Stardust project, a 77‑acre residential subdivision by Beazer Homes within the Village One Specific Plan area.
Michaela Noble, assistant planner, told commissioners the proposal includes a large‑lot tentative subdivision map and a small‑lot tentative map splitting the parcel into a mix of lot sizes (residential lots ranging from 4,500 to 15,000 square feet) to produce 302 village low‑density units, roughly 20 acres of open space and a two‑acre park. Noble said project streets will include a two‑lane Oak Tree Lane with a shared bike/NEV lane and a 10‑foot multiuse trail along open space.
Adrienne Graham, the environmental consultant who prepared the Village One Specific Plan EIR, said site‑specific biological and cultural surveys did not identify impacts beyond those addressed in the 2012 program EIR and recommended adoption of an addendum rather than preparation of a subsequent EIR. Staff noted mitigation measures from the program EIR would apply and that certain mitigation language was updated to ensure consistency with the Placer County Conservation Program.
Commissioners questioned open‑space accounting and park delivery. Graham said the specific plan as a whole maintains roughly 40% open space; the Stardust parcel reduces village open‑space acreage by 0.13 acres but increases village park/recreation and landscape corridor acreage, leaving the plan‑wide percentage intact. Noble said the proposed two‑acre park is expected to be developer‑funded and maintained by an HOA if delivered privately; if the park is not constructed as a public park, park‑credit provisions would require fee payment instead of acreage dedication. On school impact fees, staff said the Western Placer Unified School District’s letter requesting additional negotiated fees reflects the district’s standard response and that the city has not historically imposed fee agreements in excess of statutory requirements; the developer must pay statutorily required fees and the city will not issue permits until payment is verified.
Resident Joe Varman raised a neighborhood concern about a planned emergency‑vehicle access (EVA) gate to Stardust Lane; staff clarified the EVA is for emergency access only and would not serve as public vehicular through‑access. Applicant representatives (including Ina Miller and Tony Frazee) described connectivity and a 10‑foot trail modification to improve pedestrian access.
The commission moved and seconded four resolutions recommending council: adopt the CEQA addendum (Resolution 2024‑19); approve the large‑lot tentative subdivision map (Resolution 2024‑20); approve the small‑lot tentative map (Resolution 2024‑21); and approve the development agreement (Resolution 2024‑22). Each resolution passed by unanimous roll call vote. The actions forward the entitlements to City Council for final decision on the development agreement and map approvals.
