Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> Planning Commission <br />Agenda Report <br /> August 23, 2023 <br /> Item 6 <br /> <br /> <br />SUBJECT: PUD-148 <br /> <br />APPLICANT/ <br />PROPERTY OWNERS: Meenu Gochhwal & Ashish Choudhary <br /> <br />PURPOSE: Application for Planned Unit Development (PUD) development plan <br />approval to establish development standards. <br /> <br />LOCATION: 2207 Martin Avenue <br /> <br />GENERAL PLAN: Low Density Residential <br /> <br />ZONING: PUD-LDR (Planned Unit Development – Low Density Residential) <br /> <br />EXHIBITS: A. Resolution and Draft Conditions of Approval <br />B. Project Plans dated “Received June 17, 2023” <br />C. Public Comments <br /> D. Location and Notification Map <br /> <br />STAFF RECOMMENDATION <br />Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution recommending <br />approval of PUD-148 to the City Council, based on the required findings and subject to the <br />draft Conditions of Approval in Exhibit A. <br /> <br />EXECUTIVE SUMMARY <br />The proposed project would establish development standards for the subject parcel, which <br />includes an existing single-family residence constructed prior to the parcel’s annexation into <br />the City of Pleasanton in 1997. While PUD zoning was adopted for the entire annexation area <br />in 1997, the prior approvals did not establish specific development standards for the residence <br />or any ancillary structures via a PUD development plan. The Pleasanton Municipal Code <br />(PMC) Chapter 18.68.050 restricts development of a site within a planned unit development <br />district until all provision of chapter 18.68 have been completed, which includes a development <br />plan. In addition, the absence of an approved PUD development plan for the subject parcel <br />has precluded staff from providing guidance to the applicant/property owners for additional <br />development on the subject parcel. The applicant/property owners are requesting approval of a <br />PUD development plan to establish development standards for the subject parcel, including <br />addition of site specific standards for sports courts. This application reference to an existing <br />partially-built sports court constructed without City approvals and currently conflicts with <br />aspects of staff’s recommendations related to the proposed development standards for the <br />subject parcel, and as explained in more detail later in this report. As conditioned, staff finds <br />the proposed development standards would be consistent with the objectives of the General