My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
20
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2007
>
032007
>
REGULAR MEETING
>
20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/15/2007 4:02:46 PM
Creation date
3/15/2007 3:41:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
3/20/2007
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
20
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
structure to be used as a workshop. The workshop, designed to resemble a barn, is <br />proposed to be of wood shingle siding with a sandstone color. The proposed floor area <br />ratio (FAR) for Parcel A is nine percent. <br />Parcel B proposes to construct a typical farmhouse style home with horizontal wood <br />siding. The two-story house is approximately 2,947 square feet with asemi-detached <br />528-square-foot garage. The house is oriented to the north with the front entrance <br />facing the shared-access driveway. The proposed FAR for Parcel B is 15.3 percent. <br />Parcel C proposed to construct an approximately 2,668-square foot, single-story home <br />with two semi-detached garages totaling 1,100 square feet. The house is a <br />craftsman/ranch-style home with wood board and batten siding. The home is also <br />oriented to the north with the front entrance facing the shared-access driveway. The <br />proposed FAR for Parcel C is 11.2 percent. <br />DISCUSSION <br />Staff believes the proposed development adequately addresses all issues as outlined in <br />the Vineyard Avenue Corridor Specific Plan. Please reference the attached Planning <br />Commission staff report which includes a detailed discussion regarding the project's site <br />development standards; permitted and conditional uses; open space management; <br />design review; green building measures; grading plan; soils investigation report; noise, <br />dust and vibration; landscaping; fencing; and PUD ordinance findings. <br />Planning Commission <br />On February 14, 2007, the Planning Commission considered the proposed project. <br />There were no speakers and no residents or interested parties offered testimony. The <br />Planning Commission discussed the issues of disclosures. There was concern by the <br />Planning Commission that future purchasers of the proposed project may not be fully <br />disclosed to the potential nuisance issues as described by Condition No. 24 (previously <br />numbered 27). There was interest by the Planning Commission to find a way to hold <br />the developer, or City staff, accountable to ensure that the disclosures related to a <br />property were in fact provided to a potential buyer. The Planning Commission reviewed <br />the condition to determine if the language was adequate in protecting the interests of <br />future buyers. The Planning Commission recommended two modifications to the <br />conditions of approval: <br />1. Require the wording in condition 24 (previously 27) regarding the disclosure <br />statement related to the Livermore Municipal Airport to state, "including, but not <br />limited to, noise and vibration." <br />2. Correct the building height in condition number 42 (previously 38) to state 30 feet <br />instead of 25 feet. <br />Page 4 of 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.