My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 10/12/88
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1988
>
PC 10/12/88
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2017 11:22:37 AM
Creation date
4/13/2007 2:33:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/12/1988
DOCUMENT NAME
PC101288
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
neighborhood should not be damaged because of excessive numbers <br />of secondary units. She felt a comprehensive ordinance would be <br />needed without putting a burden on the rest of the neighborhood. <br />She was opposed to RV's or mobile homes; she favored detached <br />units, but felt attached ones were a possibility; she felt the <br />colors and architecture should be compatible with the main <br />structure. As to size of unit, she felt it should be in <br />relation to the rest of the lot and should be compatible in <br />design. The secondary unit should not infringe on a neighbor's <br />privacy and care must be taken in the orientation of windows. <br />Existing ordinances must be complied with. She did not favor an <br />age limit of 55 ar over; noting that a younger person might also <br />have need of such a unit. She did not favor using it as a <br />rental unit, but was not completely opposed to doing so. She <br />felt a zoning of R-I would be appropriate and should be subject <br />to the Design Review Board. <br />Commissioner Hovingh agreed with Commissioner Mahern's comments. <br />He discussed parking space requirements with Mr. Swift. <br />Mr. Swift said that two parking spaces are required at a <br />residence and this could be difficult if converting units from <br />garages. <br />Commissioner Hovingh expressed concern with the aesthetics if <br />units were not restricted to being a single story. He also felt <br />there should be parking space requirements. Ha felt any age <br />would be agreeable, but felt ft would be desirable if they were <br />related to the owner. He suggested limiting the occupants to <br />two adult persons or one adult and child, as in the case of a <br />single parent. <br />Commissioner Mahern added that she favored detached single story <br />homes, with no garden homes or condos aillowed. <br />Chairman Micheletti agreed with the other Commissioners` <br />comments. She thought this would be a good way to get <br />affordable units for the city; however, she felt appropriate <br />setbacks should not be sacrificed. She favored R-1-E,50t~ zoning; <br />she preferred the unit to be attached as shown in the article <br />included in the staff report. She felt if it were detached it <br />would need a very large lot in order to accommodate required <br />setbacks. In regard to FAR, she felt it should be 15'l. above the <br />size of the house. She discussed the parking spaces with <br />Mr. Swift. <br />fMr. Swift commented that an area between the sideyard and the <br />driveway could be utilized as a parking space. <br />Chairman Micheletti was not in favor of restrictions as to age; <br />she was not in favor of restricting units only to owners, but <br />felt it best to go on a case-by-case basis. She did not think <br />this should simply be a means of getting more rentals, but <br />primarily for helping families. She felt an applicant should <br />have to appear before the Design Review Board. <br />Page 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.