My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC-96-69
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
PC-96-69
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/15/2006 9:33:15 AM
Creation date
12/30/2004 1:52:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
9/11/1996
DOCUMENT NO
PC-96-69
DOCUMENT NAME
V-96-13
NOTES
BRANAGH DEVT
NOTES 3
VARIENCE: 3 APT UNITS W/O REQUIRED PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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
<br />PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF PLEASANTON <br /> <br />ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA <br /> <br />RESOLUTION NO. PC-96-69 <br /> <br />RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPLICATION OF BRANAGH DEVELOPMENT <br />FOR A VARIANCE, AS FILED UNDER CASE V-96-13 <br /> <br />WHEREAS, Branagh Development has applied for a variance from the Municipal Code to <br />allow the construction of three apartment dwelling units without the required <br />private open space located at 349 Main Street; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, zoning for the property is C-C (Central Commercial), Downtown Revitalization, <br />Core Area Overlay District; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, at its duly noticed public hearing of September II, 1996, the Planning <br />Commission, after considering all public testimony, relevant exhibits, and <br />recommendations of the City staff concerning this application, approved the <br />negative declaration for this project; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made the following variance findings: <br /> <br />1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including <br />size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of <br />the provisions of this chapter deprives the property of privileges enjoyed <br />by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. <br /> <br />At approximately 133 ft. in width, 130 ft. in depth, and 17,432 sq. ft.. in <br />area, the subject lot is comparable with lots in the area under the same <br />zoning district. The lot is regularly-shaped and is relatively level. <br /> <br />In this particular case, the regulations of the Downtown Design Guidelines <br />is at odds with the zoning ordinance requirement to provide open space for <br />apartment units. The design of the building would suffer and would be <br />inconsistent with the design of other Downtown buildings if the required <br />open space were provided on the three units facing Main Street. This <br />constitutes a special circumstance unique to the property. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.