My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
21 ATTACHMENT 6 AND 7
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2016
>
041916
>
21 ATTACHMENT 6 AND 7
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/30/2016 2:23:34 PM
Creation date
4/14/2016 4:02:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
4/19/2016
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
21
Document Relationships
21
(Message)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2016\041916
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
47
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
Commissioner Nagler: Could I just ask a question about that? On this replotting <br />average 40% FAR, what's the maximum FAR? <br />Schroeder: We still have a couple of 45 %'s, but nothing goes over 45% in the whole <br />thing. Isn't that right? They're all in that table. <br />Hardy: 3 are at .45. <br />Chair Ritter: So the FAR went up in support of trying to help the neighbors. <br />Schroeder: It just ended up that way because we were trying to have really nice houses <br />that fit in and you know, I think it's going to be a real benefit to the neighborhood and it's <br />the minimum lots we could get on there and make the thing work. The driving range <br />thing has driven a lot of it. The driving range issue was the biggest issue here and it's <br />taken us quite a while to work closely with the fairgrounds and with the neighbors. <br />They've been really helpful and Greg's here tonight I think still, to get to this point, and <br />so we think we've satisfied the neighbor's concern with plotting and whatnot that we've <br />done and so if you guys are comfortable with the average, we can get there. <br />Beaudin: Jeff, here's the logistic issue, I mean, 10 years from now, we're all gone and <br />somebody says I want to do an addition on my home and you say you're fine limiting it <br />but it's one of those anomalies that will only exist in your PUD. <br />Schroeder: Well, that's done in other neighborhoods like our smaller lot project. I think <br />we have that restriction at Stanley. <br />Beaudin: No additions? <br />Schroeder: Yes, there's no setback room in some of those lots. <br />Beaudin: But there will be in these ones and that's going to be the issue. People are <br />going to buy that and it's just not going to be obvious to people on the front end. <br />Schroeder: It will be in the CC &Rs. <br />Beaudin: Can I propose another way to get to where we're trying to get? If we had a <br />maximum FAR — there's a table. I don't know if everyone's looking at the table or not, <br />but it's sheet 2 of 4 and it's the RJA documents towards the end of your plan. It's 2 of 4 <br />in the staff drawings. <br />Commissioner Allen: Can you show us what you're looking at? <br />Seto: It's in this one. If you turn to the second page, it's right at Table 1. <br />Beaudin: So there's a table and it's not the easiest table to read, but there's Plan 2 <br />FARs and Plan 2 FARs with bonus as some of the column titles. They show the FARs <br />and there's certain lot, the lots are identified. What I'd like to do if there's a willingness to <br />pursue the average, then what I would say is, let's allow for the up to 45% or up to 42% <br />or however we want to limit them and go lot by lot and just set the number based on the <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 23, 2016 Page 19 of 46 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.