My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
07/10/63
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1960-1969
>
1963
>
07/10/63
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/28/2013 4:18:20 PM
Creation date
7/9/2007 9:51:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
7/10/1963
DOCUMENT NAME
07/10/63
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
will have to be done to determine how much hardship will be encountered if the <br />Variance is not granted. However, in this instance, the staff recommends the Vari- <br />ance be granted with two conditions: (1) The addition shall be of the same archi- <br />tectural style as the existing dwelling; and (2) The addition shall comply with <br />all applicable codes and ordinances of the City of Pleasanton to the eatiafaction <br />of the City Engineer. It was also pointed out that the requested Variance does not <br />extend completely across the rear yard of the subject property. Upoa motion of <br />Commissioner Antonini, seconded by Commissioner Rega, the following resolution was <br />unanimously adopted by those Commissioners present: <br />RESOLUTION N0. 228 <br />WHEREAS, application of Mra. Vincent Frevola, 4115 School Street, for <br />a Variance from Section 6.5, Ord. No. 309, 1n order to con- <br />struct an addition to a single-family dwelling which reduces the re- <br />quired rear yard, at the above location, in as R-1 District, has come <br />before this Commission; <br />NUsT, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: <br />1. The Variance is hereby granted subject to the following <br />conditions: <br />a. The addition shall be of the same architectural style <br />as the existing dwelling. <br />b. The addition shall comply with all applicable codes <br />and ordinances of the City of Pleasanton to the <br />satisfaction of the City Engineer. <br />Chairman Landon then opened the public hearing on the application of W,A. Eaton and <br />A.H. Johnson, 1780 "A" Street, Hayward, for an amendment to Ord. No. 309 rezoning <br />a parcel of approximately one acre, located on the northeast corner of Santa Rita <br />Road and Nevis Street, from R-1 to RG-15. Mr. Johnson was in the audience, ac- <br />companied by Mr, Dawes, and related the facts on the subject application. There <br />being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Landon declared the public <br />hearing closed. Mr. Fales was called on for the staff report and explained the <br />property is question is at the northeast coiner of Nevis St. and Santa Rita Road, <br />adjacent to the Santa Rita Road Well Lot and to property owned by the Elementary <br />School District which is a part of the Alisal Elementary School. The parcel case <br />originally included in Tract 2110 and was originally intended fox professional <br />offices. The parcel would be difficult to develop for R-1 purposes and would be <br />a hardship on the owners; also professional offices would not be applicable at this <br />point. RG-15 zoning would allow 29 units per acre, while RG-25 would allow 17 unit <br />per acre, The staff recommends the highest and best u~,~$f this particular parcel <br />at this time would be rezoning from R-1 to RG-25, rathe-x~7AG-15, due to the surround <br />ing R-1 area and the nature and character of adjacent uses (wells and school). <br />Thera would be no traffic problem due to direct access to Santa Rita Road. Commis- <br />sioner Rega stated he is inclined to favor R-2 zoning as more desirable than RG-25. <br />Mr, Fales stated RG-25 would allow for more amenities and community living than <br />would be afforded in R-2 zoning. City Attorney Struthers said conditions can be <br />attached to the rezoning if reasonable, but it is not possible to "overzone" and <br />then tighten up. Mr. Johnson said R-2 zoning is not popular, it is difficult to <br />sell property zoned as such, and he would not be interested in R-2 zoning and would <br />prefer to abandon the plan rather than have the subject property zoned R-2. Mr. <br />Dawes stated that under RG-25 zoning they could build 16 unite (four fourpleaea) <br />rather than the 20 unite they had originally planned. Mr. Fales added that less <br />density implicitly behooves the developer to landscape and use imagination to a <br />greater degree than highe+: density. Chairman Landon said there may be some problem <br />in our Zoning Ordinance which needs changing, end wondered if the applicant would <br />agree to a continuance. Gnmmisaioner Rega said he would like to see an RG-25 lay- <br />eut before making a deci.oion. Comni.eaioner Antonini stated each unit would be <br />saleable individually. Chairman Landon said he wished to give the matter further <br />study. Commissioner Wipfli said he would like to ae~ a firm plan before making a <br />decision, Upon motion of Commissioner Rega, seconded by Commissioner Wipf11, the <br />following reaolurion was adopted by the following vote: Aye9: Commi.eaionera Rega, <br />Wipfli and Chairman L2.vdon; Naea: Commisrionur Antonini; Absent: Coa~issioner <br />Lozano: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.