My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
17
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2013
>
082013
>
17
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/25/2013 12:31:08 PM
Creation date
8/14/2013 2:25:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
8/20/2013
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
17
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
86
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
CONCLUSION <br /> Rezoning the site to PUD-MDR/OS-PH&S/WO (Planned Unit Development — Medium <br /> Density Residential/Open Space — Public Health and Safety/Wildland Overlay) is <br /> consistent with Pleasanton General Plan and the Downtown Specific Plan Land Use <br /> Designations of High Density Residential. Infill developments, especia ly those located <br /> on the relatively small parcels in the Downtown, face various chal enges and site <br /> constraints that oftentimes require and benefit from the flexibility allowed by the Planned <br /> Unit Development zoning process. <br /> Option 1, as revised and now proposed, blends well with the Downtown's character and <br /> impacts to the adjacent residents have been minimized by keeping the density to 12 <br /> new single-family homes instead of the 14 proposed in Option 2. The positioning of <br /> homes in Option 1 is appropriate and the homes are modest in height for two-story <br /> structures. The units are designed and sized to provide an attractive and livable <br /> environment for the future residents and with the incorporation of the private, pedestrian <br /> pathway into Option 1, future residents who live in this development will be able to have <br /> direct access to the Downtown, patronizing Downtown businesses and amenities, thus <br /> supporting and adding to the economic viability of Downtown. Therefore, staff <br /> recommends that the Council approve Option 1 and require the applicant and/or <br /> responsible party to return with a PUD modification and General and Specific Plan <br /> amendments to allow limited, commercial personal services and/or office uses. <br /> Submitt d by: Fiscal Review: Approve y: <br /> Brian olan Emily ]ily Wagner Nelson Fialho <br /> Director of Director of Finance City Manager <br /> Community Development <br /> Attachments: <br /> 1. Draft City Council Ordinance for Option 1 for PUD-97 with Exhibit A, <br /> Recommended Conditions of Approval <br /> 2. Draft City Council Ordinance for Option 2 for PUD-97 with Exhibit A, <br /> Recommended Conditions of Approval <br /> 3. Exhibit B: Proposed PUD Development Plan, dated "Received June 14, 2013" <br /> with Site Plans, Grading and Utility Plan, Slope Classification Plan, Stormwater <br /> Treatment Plan, Existing Trees Plan, Floor, Roof, and Elevation Plans, <br /> Landscape Site Plan, Landscape Streetscape, and Landscape Details Plan <br /> 4. Exhibit B.1: Alternative Site Plan, dated "Received August 2, 21)13." <br /> 5. Excerpts of the Planning Commission meeting minutes, dated July 10, 2013 <br /> 6. July 10, 2013, Planning Commission Staff Report with the following <br /> Attachments: <br /> C. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Excerpt dated November 28, 2012 <br /> D. Planning Commission Work Session Staff Report dated November 28, 2012 <br /> Page 16 of 17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.