My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 07/13/77
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1970-1979
>
1977
>
PC 07/13/77
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/31/2017 4:19:53 PM
Creation date
4/30/2007 11:53:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
7/13/1977
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 07/13/77
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
Chairman Butler indicated he was delighted to see financial institutions <br />locating in the downtown area. Commissioner Wood told the representatives <br />of Citizens Savings and Loan the City appreciated their confidence. <br />PUD-77-3, Morrison Homes, Inc. - Review of negative declaration for a project <br />to construct a 78-unit planned unit development at the site located between <br />Hopyard Road and Valley Avenue. <br />Application to rezone a 10-acre site located between Hopyard Road and Valley <br />Avenue behind the Alpha Beta Shopping Center and including both sides of <br />the future Northway Road, and a 4.1 acre site located on the northeast corner <br />of Black Avenue and Hopyard Road from the RM-1500 and RM-2500 Districts to <br />the PUD (High Density Residential) District. Morrison Homes is further <br />seeking approval of a development plan for the 10-acre site which would <br />contain duplex units. <br />Secretary Harris stated that the intent of the developer is to rezone two <br />separate pieces of property. The reason for this is because development <br />proposed for the 10 ac. site at Valley and Northway would not be in conform- <br />ity with the density designation of the General Plan for that property. The <br />applicant's proposal shows the parcel on Black, which if added to the other <br />site, would qualify this application for the required General Plan density <br />designation. He then provided the Planning Commissions with a brief descrip- <br />tion of the General Plan density designation for the Medium and High Density <br />Residential categories. Another point of consideration would be whether the <br />development plan is consistent with the General Plan, or any specific plan <br />for the area. <br />City Attorney, Ken Scheidig then voiced opinions of his interpretation of <br />the application. <br />Mr. Scheidig's position was that before rezoning of the property can take <br />place, it would be necessary to amend the General Plan to coincide with the <br />requested zoning. He stated that the PUD ordinance does not preclude any- <br />one from filing a single PUD application for two or more non-contiguous pro- <br />perties but he believed that such a procedure violated the intent of the <br />PUD ordinance. The Planning Commission was asked to consider its PUD approval <br />of Valley Memorial Hospital on Santa Rita Road and questions of contiguity <br />raised there. Mr. Scheidig indicated that there was no guarantee that the <br />Black Avenue property would be zoned at a higher density to make up for the <br />deficiency in density at the Valley Avenue site. His major concern was the <br />impact of the proposed density transfer request upon the present and future <br />general plan consistency determinations by the Planning Commission. The <br />proposed project yields only 7.5 dwelling units per acre, while being in a <br />high density (15 units to the gross acre) category on the General Plan. <br />His concern is that if a developer is allowed to develop property in one <br />General Plan density cateogry by using the density on property in another <br />area, this would circumvent the density ranges of the General Plan. There <br />would be nothing to present another developer from proposing exactly the <br />same type of arrangement. Eventually, by the use of this approach, the <br />goals of the General Plan would be affected. Additionally, the non-contiguous <br />phase development proposed would need City Council permission. It was his <br />opinion that if the Planning Commission allowed the application, as is, it <br />-5- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.