CCMIN100703 - Laserfiche WebLink

subject to routine review by the Planning Commission. This is consistent with how minor subdivisions are handled within the City. He pointed out that new houses, in most zoning districts, are reviewed by the Zoning Administrator and not by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission felt it should review all subdivisions and all house plans the way it would ifa new stand-alone PUD were being proposed on each and every lot. He noted that there is a difference of opinion on how to proceed with this. In response to an inquiry by Mr. Campbell, Mr. Swirl informed him that Ruby Hills has a PUD which is approved and establishes all the standards and setbacks, the floor area ratios and height limits, etc. Anyone who is building a custom home in Ruby Hills brings the plans into the City and asks for them to be reviewed. Mr. Brozosky's believed that in order to build a custom home in Ruby Hill, one must go through an internal design review process first with Ruby Hills before it is taken to the City level. Mr. Swirl noted that project has CC&R's. Mr. Campbell asked what the Planning Commission's rationale was regarding the floor area ratios. Mr. Swirl indicated that the typical lot size would be two acres in size. He noted that the Specific Plan does allow one lot to be to a minimum of one acre as long as the other lot is three acres. Staff felt that when there are lots of those sizes, a floor area ratio does not make sense. The intention was to create and to allow a continuation of the semi- rural flavor that currently exists. Staff felt the floor area ratio is not the best tool to regulate certain kinds of accessory structures. The normal floor area ratio rules apply to both the main house and accessory structures, so that if you wanted to allow someone to have a reasonably sized house with a typical barn, then the floor area for those added together would be much larger than for a house. Staff felt that the guidelines within the Specific Plan are sufficient to protect the open space feel of the surrounding neighborhood because it pertains directly to those types of issues. On the other hand, the Planning Commission felt not only should they be doing the review, but that there be established limits with respect to floor area. Ms. Hosterman wondered if there was an opportunity to separate main houses from accessory buildings and whether or not there was a possibility to look at the Adams and Wentworth's parcels separate from those other properties that have yet to be annexed. She asked if there were a way to allow those families to proceed with building on their sites with the same appropriate guidelines that we want to see carried throughout the Happy Valley area. She would also like to be able to set out some guidelines so that we can meet the objective for the remaining properties as well. Mr. Swirl indicated that Council might zone just those properties that are within the City and not prezone the other properties. This action would then require Council to prezone those other properties before any other property could be annexed, which is a Pleasanton City Council 23 Minutes 10/07/03