My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
4
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2020 - PRESENT
>
2022
>
04-27
>
4
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/20/2022 1:52:45 PM
Creation date
4/20/2022 1:45:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
4/27/2022
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Document Relationships
4_Exhibit B - Plans
(Attachment)
Path:
\BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\AGENDA PACKETS\2020 - PRESENT\2022\04-27
4_Exhibits A & C
(Attachment)
Path:
\BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\AGENDA PACKETS\2020 - PRESENT\2022\04-27
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
The applicant is proposing a blue/grey color palette, horizontal siding, composition roof, and <br /> trim materials similar to the existing residence. Additional details of the proposed architecture <br /> and materials can be further reviewed in the attached Project Plans, Exhibit B, with the <br /> project's colors and materials board available upon request (see Figure 6). <br /> Figure 6: Proposed Elevations <br /> Front Building: Two Units <br /> t.u ; <br /> •^ I11,1 T- iyqt <br /> • 11 _ e4 <br /> WING1 WEST ELEVATION BUILDING,1 SOUTH ELEVATION BUILDING 1 EAST ELEVATION BULDI401 NORTH ELEVATION <br /> Rear Building: Garage with Unit Above <br /> r FJK*?n�KK�4 <br /> -1 <br /> IM <br /> Hi VN <br /> •• !fY <br /> 411.1 i LAW ON I <br /> 1 " <br /> i—_-I I��IMI�tMlx`,—� i>� <br /> �� :�� f la. r{, ...��. .i, <br /> BULDIIO 2 WEST ELEVATION BUILDING 2 SOUTH ELEVATION BUILDING 2 EAST ELEVATION BUILDING 2 NORTH ELEVATION <br /> Internal circulation within the site will remain largely unaltered with access via the existing <br /> driveway from Rose Avenue. The proposed project involves minor site modifications, including <br /> paving the gravel driveway, replacing the rear hardscape, reorganizing and providing seven <br /> on-site parking spaces, and new landscaping. <br /> An arborist report was provided which evaluated 10 trees, with four of the trees being <br /> heritage-size. Three trees are proposed to be removed, including a heritage silk oak in the <br /> general location of the proposed two-unit building at the front of the lot. The remaining seven <br /> trees are proposed to be retained. While three trees are being removed, the project includes a <br /> planting plan that incorporates ground cover and shrubs as well as a new crape myrtle tree <br /> near the driveway entrance, and new plantings in the currently barren area located to the west <br /> of the public sidewalk. <br /> ANALYSIS <br /> General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan Consistency and Land Uses <br /> The General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan designate the project site as High Density <br /> Residential — allowing for residential development of greater than eight units per gross acre. <br /> The General Plan identifies a "mid-point" density of 15 dwelling units/acre for the High Density <br /> Residential land use designation. The General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan have <br /> language that encourages and/or allows a variety of housing types (i.e., detached and <br /> attached single-family homes, duplexes, townhouses, condominiums, and apartments) under <br /> the high-density designation provided all requirements of the Zoning Ordinance are met. As <br /> proposed, there would be four dwelling units on the 0.27-acre project site, which results in a <br /> P19-0410, 715 Rose Avenue Planning Commission <br /> 5 of 11 <br />LEu I <br /> PROPOSED SITE PLAN 9`j+ <br /> P19-0410, 715 Rose Avenue Planning Commission <br /> 4 of 11 <br />d in the report. <br /> 10.Future Planning Calendar <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 8 February 23, 2022 <br /> to be a <br /> leading innovator in providing affordable housing for the Pleasanton workforce. He suggested <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 8 February 23, 2022 <br />icing was critical. She suggested reconsidering <br /> the basis for the low-income housing study, especially for residential. She requested more data <br /> on the expenditure of funding and what percentage was directed at adding more housing versus <br /> the other programs, because HCD was looking at the number of built units. She stated it was <br /> worth exploring a housing overlay zone but the ordinance should align with State law for short <br /> term. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 7 February 9, 2022 <br />a business person would be equal with building a unit and paying an IZO. <br /> Ms. Clark explained the basis for the inclusionary zoning requirement, and the amount of the <br /> low-income housing fee were different and therefore, there was a disjuncture between the two <br /> fees (i.e. the in-lieu fee does not cover 100 % of the cost of constructing an affordable unit). <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 7 February 9, 2022 <br />