21 ATTACHMENT 6 AND 7 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner O'Connor moved to forward Case PUD -99 to the City Council with a recommendation for approval by making the three findings in the staff report and with the modification that only 5 of the 9 homes currently shown with the bonus room are constructed with the bonus room, and with the new condition of approval based on the memorandum submitted March 23, 2016 to the Planning Commission from staff. Commissioner Nagler seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Allen, O'Connor, Nagler, and Ritter NOES: None ABSTAIN: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: Commissioner Balch Resolution No. PC- 2016 -07 approving Case PUD -99 was entered and adopted as motioned. BREAK Chair Ritter called for a 5- minute break at 8:53 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:57 p.m. A b. P15 -0551. Catalvst Development Partners Work Session to review and receive comments on a Prelimirwomeview application to relocate the existing single - family residen m 536 St. John Street to 4372 Pleasanton Avenue and construc ownhomes at 536 and 550 St. John Street and the adjacent vac t. Zoning for the properties are RM -1,500 (Multi - Family Reside J Core Area Overlay District (536 and 550 St. John Street) R -1 -6,500 (One - Family Residential), Core Area Overlay District Pleasanton Avenue). Natalie Amos presented the staff report a escribed the scope, layout, and key elements of the proposal. Todd Deutscher, Applicant, Ca Development Partners: In planning the development of this site we've ed very hard with staff to try and come up with something that was consiste, ith the Downtown Design Guidelines and we weren't as concerned with the max ity we could put in or the max height. We tried something that I would consider conomically and morally highest and best use for Pleasanton, so that when you by the site it gives a very good feel. I think that the maximum density is aboul units and this plan ended up being 12. We elected not to even pursue a thr ory product here just because there's no need to ... we can achieve our goals inte y and still maintain the consistency of the roof lines in the neighborhood by doi e product that we did. The parking is 2 -car garages. Both parking spots are cov for each unit. And I know one of the comments that planner Amos had shared me was regard to the fence in the rear and the adjacent neighbors there. I think we PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 23, 2016 Page 25 of 46