My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 05:258
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2005
>
SR 05:258
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/16/2005 12:13:13 PM
Creation date
9/15/2005 4:44:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
9/20/2005
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 05:258
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
90
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
<br />Peer Review <br />The Planning Commission requested the project be evaluated by the City's peer review <br />architect, Cannon Design Group. The peer review indicates that the project is well <br />designed overall and concentrated on suggestions for additional details that could be <br />added to enhance the proposed design, as follows: <br /> I) Provide more articulation on the belly band, or make it smaller; <br /> 2) Reduce the size of the trim at all sills and around the windows; <br /> 3) Add trim to the deck fronts to produce shadow lines; <br /> 4) Consider a planter and lattice to soften the deck divider; <br /> 5) Add garage doors with windows and detail the second story elevation <br /> above the garages with additional lattice and trellis on the St. John Street <br /> units; <br /> 6) Enlarge columns at porch elements; and, <br /> 7) Reduce window size on second floor at unit rear. <br />The applicant agreed to these suggestions with the exception of adding garage doors. <br />Staff agrees that garage doors would not be necessary and may cause the garages to be <br />used for storage instead of parking. <br />Housing Commission <br />The Planning Commission requested the item be reviewed and commented by the <br />Housing Commission. Staff notes that since the project has less than 15 units it is not <br />subject to the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. <br />On June 16,2005 staff presented the project to the Housing Commission. The Housing <br />Commission expressed support for the project as one that was affordable by design, <br />declared support for the proposed density, added that this is the type of project the City is <br />encouraging developers to build, and acknowledged the project was not subject to the <br />Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. The applicant was congratulated for his efforts and was <br />requested to return to provide the Commission with some numbers related to sales and <br />rents for units of this housing type. <br />Parking <br />The Planning Commission expressed concern related to parking, noting that the proposed <br />project could impact or reduce existing on-street parking currently serving the adjacent <br />commercial uses. <br />Residential developments are generally required to provide two on-site parking spaces per <br />dwelling unit. However, the Downtown Core Area Overlay District requires only I Y, <br />spaces per unit for rental units with two bedrooms. The proposed project consists of four <br />SR:05:258 <br />Page 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.