CCMIN071602 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Swift said the issue of precedence arose from the table in the North Sycamore Specific Plan, which showed this property with three lots rather than four. Considering the density rules, the way Sycamore Creek Road was built, and the efficient nature of the Moreira proposed subdivision, the four lots would meet all the requirements. The question raised by the Planning Commission was whether there were any other lots in the North Sycamore Specific Plan area where the table showed a certain number of lots and the owner could propose a larger number of lots. Staff does not believe there are any other lots that are perfectly situated to allow one more lot than what was called for in the table in the Specific Plan. Mr. Campbell asked why the Planning Commission denied the application. Mr. Swift responded that it felt a three-lot subdivision would blend into the neighborhood better than a four-lot subdivision in terms of overall density, mass of buildings and the way it could be designed. There was concern that using four lots rather than the three lots specified in the table could set a precedent. He believed the staff information allayed that particular concern. Ms. Michelotti inquired about fencing for this property. Mr. Swift said the Planning Commission did not reach a recommendation on this. The Specific Plan calls for rural type fencing in that area. He believed there would not be much fencing and what would be there would be open. Peter MacDonald, 400 Main Street, Suite 210, representing the property owners, indicated he had four basic points to make. The Moreiras have the support of their neighbors; the four-lot subdivision is consistent with the North Sycamore Specific Plan; these are huge flat lots; and for the City to meet the promises set forth in the Housing Element, it has to honor its adopted plan on a home by home basis or it will fail to achieve the Housing Element goals. Many of the Moreiras' neighbors were at the Planning Commission in support of the application. Janet Burton submitted a letter in opposition, but after a meeting with her, her concerns have been addressed. There is a signed agreement which will be recorded. One aspect of the Burton agreement requires a modification to the proposed PUD. Condition 18 requires the screen trees adjacent to her lot be planted prior to recordation of the final subdivision map. The landscape professional told them the best time to design the landscape screen was when the design of the new home on the Moreira's lot is known. Also the best time to install landscaping is after construction, since new trees could be damaged. He asked that Condition No. 18 be modified to be consistent with the Burton agreement to provide "landscape installation shall he complete nine months after final building inspection on the new home on Lot 1." The only remaining neighbor concern is from Greenbriar Homes. It has requested one story homes on Lots 2 and 3. He said Greenbriar is asking for a standard it is not applying to its own subdivision. It has built a two story model home overlooking the existing of home of the Moreiras. These are large lots that can readily accommodate two-story homes. The Moreiras are willing to accept a 35 foot set back from the back property line for two story homes on Lots 2 and 3 bordering the Greenbriar homes. He pointed out that is ten feet larger than the set back on the Greenbriar two-story home overlooking the Moreiras' residence. The four-lot subdivision is consistent with the Specific Plan, which is why staff recommended approval of the PUD. The Specific Plan calls for 15,000 Pleasanton City Council 20 07/16/02 Minutes