My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 2005-33
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
PC 2005-33
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/30/2007 4:32:43 PM
Creation date
3/6/2006 9:18:14 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
7/13/2005
DOCUMENT NO
PC 2005-33
DOCUMENT NAME
PDR-466
NOTES
BRANT & GINA DAOUST
NOTES 3
CONSTRUCT 4,100 SF HOME
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
YLANNINCi C7OMMISSION CITY OF PLEASANTON <br />ALA MEDA COUNTY, C'ALIPORNIA <br />RESOLUTION NO. PC-2005-33 <br />RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPLICATION OF BRANT AND GINA DAOUST <br />FOR DESIGN REVIEW AYVROVAL, AS PILED iJNDER CASE PDR-466 <br />W tIEREAS, Brant and Gina Daoust have applied for design review approval to construct an <br />approximately 4, 1 00-square-foot single-fan-iily custom hoinc attd for a minor <br />modification Case PUD-OI-8M~ to an approved development plan to modify the <br />development standards to reduce the required 25-foot rear yard setback to 15 feet <br />at 2503 Vineyard Avenue in the Vineyard Avenue Corridor Specific Plan Area- <br />and <br />WHEREAS, zoning for the property is PUD-LDR Planned Unit Development -Low Density <br />Residential) District; and <br />WHEREAS, at its duly noticed public hearing of July 13, 2005, the Planning Commission <br />considered all public testimony, relevant exhibits, and recommendations of the= <br />City staff concerning this application; and <br />WHEREAS, an enviror~iiiental review of the proposed project would be covered by the Initial <br />Study and Negative Declaration approved for this site by the CJ ity Council for <br />PUD-O1 in conformance with the standards of the California Environmental <br />Quality Act ~CEQA~; there arc no substantial changes to the project or to the <br />circumstances under which the project is undertaken that involve new signiFcant <br />environmental effects or that substantially increase the severity of previously <br />identified effects furthermore, there is no new information of substantial <br />importance which was known at the time that the Negative Declaration was <br />approved by the City Council regarding the project or its effects, mitigation <br />measures, ar alternatives; any previously ideniit3ed effects or impacts are <br />ireitigated to a level of insignificance, with the mitigation measures incorporated <br />i»LO the prof ect's design or imposed on the project pursuant to the conditions of <br />approval; acid <br />WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determined that Case PUD-OI-BM should be processed <br />as a minor modification; and <br />WHEREAS, the Planning Commission further detcrnzined that the proposed project is <br />consistent with the appearance of the existing buildings in the area- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.