My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
3_Exhibits A & C
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2010-2019
>
2019
>
06-12
>
3_Exhibits A & C
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/5/2019 9:21:20 AM
Creation date
6/5/2019 9:21:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
6/12/2019
Document Relationships
3
(Message)
Path:
\BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\AGENDA PACKETS\2010-2019\2019\06-12
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
EXHIBIT A <br /> RESOLUTION NO. PC-2019-12 <br /> A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON <br /> APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW <br /> APPLICATIONS AT 455 SYCAMORE ROAD FOR PATRICIA RUVALCABA ON BEHALF <br /> OF JAMES AND KELLY MORGENROTH [P19-0112 AND P19-0113] <br /> WHEREAS, on April 26, 2019, Patricia Ruvalcaba, on behalf of James and Kelly <br /> Morgenroth, applied for Conditional Use Permit and Administrative Design Review to construct <br /> an approximately 700-square-foot, single-story addition to the east side of the existing <br /> detached garage at 455 Sycamore Road; and <br /> WHEREAS, zoning for the property is PUD-MDR (Planned Unit Development — Medium <br /> Density Residential) District; and <br /> WHEREAS, the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental <br /> Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301, (Existing Facilities). Therefore, no additional <br /> environmental review is required; and <br /> WHEREAS, on June 12, 2019, the Planning Commission held a duly-noticed public <br /> hearing and considered relevant exhibits, recommendations of the City staff concerning this <br /> application, and received testimony from the applicant and interested parties. <br /> NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of <br /> Pleasanton, based on the entire record of proceedings, including the oral and written staff <br /> reports and all public comment and testimony: <br /> Section 1: Findings for Conditional Use Permit Approval <br /> With respect to the approval of the Conditional Use Permit (Case P19-0112), the Planning <br /> Commission makes the following findings as required by Section 18.124.070 of the Pleasanton <br /> Municipal Code: <br /> A. That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accordance with the <br /> objectives of the zoning ordinance and the purpose of the district in which the <br /> site is located. <br /> The Planning Commission found the request for the addition to conform to the purpose <br /> and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and North Sycamore Specific Plan (NSSP) and <br /> determined that while there are no established site development standards for the lot, <br /> the Commission considered the R-1-40,000 Zoning District standards to be the <br /> applicable development standards for this project. The Commission also found it <br /> acceptable for the proposed addition to be built with the same front yard setback as the <br /> existing garage (15 feet) since the addition would be located approximately 300 feet <br /> away from Sycamore Road and the addition wouldn't be visible from the road. <br /> Therefore, the Planning Commission was able to make this finding. <br /> to secure approval of an addition without a <br /> longer PUD process. <br /> P19-0112 and P19-0113, 455 Sycamore Road Planning Commission <br /> 5 of 6 <br />ees and landscaping on- and <br /> off-site. <br /> North Sycamore Specific Plan Design Guidelines <br /> Since the subject property is in the NSSP area, the NSSP area standards and guidelines will <br /> also apply to the proposed project. <br /> P19-0112 and P19-0113, 455 Sycamore Road Planning Commission <br /> 4 of 6 <br />