CCMIN022283 - Laserfiche WebLink

217 Mr. Lund advised that since the Planning Commission meeting he had made an attempt to mitigate the concerns of the neighbors. He stated he could reduce the size of the units and move the buildings further back to maintain the 20 ft. minimum setbacks on the lots adjacent to Entrada Drive and Del Sol but this would require eliminating the sauna. He stated a tree height limit could be included in the CC&R's to a maximum of the adjoining roofs. He stated that he could reduce the number of windows that face toward adjoining property, and could realign existing driveways exiting on Neal Street westerly, and eliminate lig!~t that might adversely affect surrounding ~.eighbors. Mr. Lund stated the parking ratios of this application are a good as any standard sub- division. He stated he felt the reasons for the concern of the neighbors is to delay the project. Mayor Butler asked how the property would be developed if approved under its cur- rent R-1-6500 zoning. Mr. Barbee presented a map showing a plan that he had prepared several years ago which had eleven lots plus Dr. Connolly's residence and business. He stated the lots are exactly the same as those on Entrada and Del Sol. Mayor Butler stated that condition 21 of the Planning Commission resolution ad- dressed storm drains. He asked Mr. Barbee if he felt the storm drain system can be satisfactorily done with the plan as proposed. Mr. Barbee stated he did not see any reason why it wouldn't. He stated the sanitary sewer line might have to be moved. He stated the City has a 19 ft. storm drain easement that is eroded and there is a heri- tage tree in the middle of the easement so that a pipeline could not be put in there. He stated the pipeline and easement could be relocated to the northwest or to the south so as not to interfere with the roots of the heritage tree. He advised it would be costly to do so but that it could be done. He concluded by stating the sewer and storm drain could be made to work. Councilmember Brandes asked how many homes could be constructed under the R-1-6500 zoning on the 1.6 acres only. Mr. Barbee advised it would easily accommodate eight structures and possibly nine with some minor rearranging. Mr. Lund stated the subdivision map that Council is viewing was put together to show what could be done as single-family residential but that Dr. Connolly has no intention of letting this be done. Mr. Robert Meyers, 717 E. Angela Street, general partner of the 2.3 acres adja- cent to this project, spoke in favor of this project, stating it would be in the best interests of the City as well as improve the flooding conditions around the convales- cent hospital. He stated the hospital had received flood damage in the last storm. He questioned who is responsible for liability if the storm sewer is not taken care of. He stated it needs to be properly maintained in order to relieve flooding condi- tions. The following persons spoke in opposition to the proposed project: Ms. Marlene Sandberg, 450 Neal Street, representing the homeowners in Pleasanton Heights, stated this group is against duplexes being allowed in the Pleasanton Heights area; in their opinion it should be single-family residential. She strongly opposed this project. Ms. Mary Foust, 431 Neal Street, stated that the City of Pleasanton is proud of its heritage existence and that there are several heritage homes in the immediate vicinity of the proposed project. She stated that duplexes are incompatible with heritage homes and she requested that Council think about the preservation of the heritage homes. She stated she had improved 1.1 acres behind her home but had done so with the concern of the neighbors in mind. Councilmember Brandes asked Ms. Foust if she would be in favor of R-1-6500 zoning development on the property. She stated she would favor single family residential at this location done by a positive creative developer to allow options. 5. 2/22/83