|
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the applied for zoning permit be granted
<br />subject to the condition that applicant use
<br />shake roofs on all the houses in the proposed
<br />development covered by said application Z-68-11.
<br />6. NEW BUSINESS - PUBLIC HEARINGS
<br />a. Application of the Planning Co~iseion to amend Sec. 2.100 to correct
<br />typographical error regarding the front yard setbacks for the following
<br />districts: R-1 10,000; R-1 8,500; R-1 6,500; R-M 4,000; R-M 2,500;
<br />R-M 2,000; R-M 1,500; from 15 ft., to 23 ft.
<br />Chairman Antonini opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Castro read the staff
<br />report. There being no comments from the audience, upon motion of
<br />Commissioner Garrigan, seconded by Chairman Antonini, and carried, the
<br />Public Hearing was closed. UPON MOTION OF COMMISSIONER GARRIGAN, SECONDED
<br />BY CHAIRMAN ANTONINI, THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY UNANIMOUS
<br />VOTE.
<br />RESOLUTION N0. 807
<br />WHEREAS, application of the Planning Commission to amend
<br />Sec. 2.100 to correct typographical error
<br />regarding the front yard setbacks for. the
<br />following setbacks for the following districts:
<br />R-1 10,000; R-1 8,500; R-1 6,500; R-M 4,000;
<br />R-M 2,500; R-M 2,000; R-M 1,500; from 15 ft.,
<br />to 23 ft., has come before this Commission,
<br />NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Co®iasion hereby recommends
<br />to t't~e City Council that Ordinance No. 520,
<br />Sec. 2.100 be amended to read as follows:
<br />"front yard 15 ft. to 23 ft."
<br />b. Application of the Planning Commission to amend Sec. 18.100 by removing
<br />the words, "and duplexes."
<br />Chairman Antonini opened the Public Hearing, and the department noted that
<br />there is a conflict in Article 5 and Article 18, relating to multiple-
<br />family zesidences. Article 5, Sec. 5.109, states that all uses shall come
<br />under review except one-family dwellings. Article 18, Sec. 18.100 states
<br />that duplexes will be exempt from review. It was the opinion of the
<br />Planning Department that a duplex use constitutes a multiple use, and
<br />therefore, should come under Design Review Board. By majority w te, the
<br />Planning Commission agreed that duplexes should come under the control
<br />of the Design Review Board for the following reasons:
<br />1. A duplex does constitute a multiple use.
<br />2. Should a large parcel of land be zoned for duplex use and it was
<br />the desire of the developer to build a series of duplexes either on
<br />separate lots or in cluster design, it was the opinion of the Planning
<br />Commission that this type of development or concept be examined by
<br />the Design Review Board.
<br />Upon motion of Commissioner Garrigan, seconded by Chairman Antonini, and
<br />carried, the Public Hearing was closed. UPON MOTION OF CHAIRMAN ANTONINI,
<br />SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ARNOLD, THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED.
<br />RESOLUTION N0, 808
<br />WHEREAS, the applicatinn of the Planning Commission
<br />to amend Sec. 18.100 by removing the words,
<br />"and duplexes," has come before this
<br />Commission,
<br />NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission hereby recommends
<br />to the City Council that Ordinance No. 520,
<br />Sec. 18.100 be amended by removing the words,
<br />°'and duplexes."
<br />PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission
<br />of the City of Pleasanton on the 14th day of
<br />August, 1968, by the following vote:
<br />- 7 -
<br />
|