My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
05
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2021
>
092121
>
05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/16/2021 10:24:26 AM
Creation date
9/16/2021 10:22:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
9/21/2021
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Document Relationships
05 ATTACHMENT 1 EXHIBIT B
(Message)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2021\092121
05 ATTACHMENTS 2-5
(Message)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2021\092121
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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
Figure 5: Focused Site Plan <br />.-�L-.-.. �.. ...._... <br />d <br />bL <br />n <br />I <br />" <br />VJ <br />I I <br />DISCUSSION <br />Development on the project site is governed by the following land use designations and <br />regulations: <br />General Plan: The General Plan land use designation is Low Density Residential, <br />which allows a maximum density of less than two dwelling units per gross acre <br />(translating to a density of 1.999... dwelling units per acre). The proposal, for two <br />units would reflect an equivalent density of 1.2 dwelling units per acre, which is <br />consistent with the low-density designation. <br />• Zonina: The site is zoned PUD-LDR, which, per the PMC, would require <br />development standards for the project to be established as part of the PUD <br />development plan. <br />The proposed density is above the mid -point density of 1 du/ac and would typically <br />require a public amenity with development, per the General Plan. Examples of <br />amenities include the provision of affordable housing, and dedication and/or <br />improvement of parkland, open space, and/or trails beyond the standard requirements. <br />However, at its public hearing on the prezoning (Ordinance No. 1709 for RZ-97-2) the <br />City Council supported staff and Planning Commission recommendations of a density of <br />a density "approaching two dwelling units per acre, i.e. 1.999 ... du/acre" for the entire <br />areas subject to annexation, including this site. The Planning Commission agenda <br />report also discussed the provision of amenities, recognizing this would be above the <br />mid -point density. The Planning Commission and City Council concurred with staffs <br />recommendation that no additional amenities or benefits needed to be provided in <br />conjunction with the density conferred, based on the following factors: <br />1. The average density of the area surrounding the prezoning project area is 2 <br />du/ac. <br />2. The difference between 2 du/ac versus 1 du/ac would be approximately 33 more <br />dwellings across the entire area. Although a substantial difference, available land <br />Page 7 of 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.