Laserfiche WebLink
RE: <br /> <br />I WHEREAS: <br /> <br />CITY OF PLEASANTON <br /> COUNTY OF ALAMEDA <br /> STA'FE OF CALIFORNIA <br /> <br />f;EE J, LUTION ['iO. 70-48 <br /> <br />DENIAL OF APPEAL OF HERMAN RUTH FROM AN ADVERSE DECISIO] <br />OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN CONNECTION WITH PLANNED <br />UNiT DEVELOPMENT 69-6 <br /> <br /> The Planning Commission, on December 10, !9~9, by Resolu- <br /> tion 970, denied appellant% revi.sed preli~,~nar¥ Planned <br /> Unit Development plans; and <br /> <br /> ~EREAS: Appellant, ~erman Ruth appealed said decls~on to the <br /> City Council, whereupon sald appeal ~as set for hearing <br /> and thereafter continued from time to t~me~ and <br /> <br />~HEREAS: On March 9, 1970, said appeal was heard and evidence both <br /> oral and documentary considered; <br /> <br /> THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOW~S: <br /> <br /> i. That the appeal of Herman Ruth from a denial by the Plan- <br /> ning Commission of his preliminary development plan, <br /> ?UD 69-6, is denied on the following grounds: <br /> <br /> A. That said proposal, if implem~d~would involve an <br /> <br /> increase in density ~it~in the "Roaepointe" Subdi- <br /> vi, sion wholly inconsistent with that at which <br /> existing homes have been constructed. <br /> <br /> B. That implementation of said proposal would effect <br /> an undue burden upon the traffic circulation patter~ <br /> in the immediate area. <br /> <br /> C. That the proposal, as submitted, would be inharmon- <br /> ious architecturally with surrounding single-family <br /> developments. <br /> <br /> <br />