My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 080807
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
PC 080807
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:31:05 PM
Creation date
10/16/2007 3:37:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
8/8/2007
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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
b. PREV-663, M.T.O. Shahmaghsoudi <br /> <br /> <br />Work Session to review and receive comments on a preliminary review proposal <br />for: (1) a conditional use permit to operate a church facility; and (2) design <br />review approval to construct a church complex on three parcels totaling <br />6.12 acres. One of the parcels, APN 941-1580-046-00, is located at 10890 Dublin <br />Canyon Road within the Pleasanton city limits, and is zoned A (Agriculture) <br />District; the other two parcels, APN 941-1580-003-03 (10712 Dublin Canyon <br />Road) and APN 941-1580-002-05 (no street address on record) are located in <br />Unincorporated Alameda County. <br /> <br />Ms. Decker summarized the staff report and described the background, scope, and layout <br />of this project. She noted that approximately 61 e-mails had been received on this item, <br />with 27 voicing support and 31 opposing the project. She noted that this application was <br />a preliminary review and that the project would return as an application for design review <br />and use permit for consideration by the Planning Commission. She stated that these <br />entitlements are not forwarded to the City Council unless the Planning Commission’s <br />decision were appealed. She added that any approval would be contingent upon the other <br />two parcels being annexed into the City; however, the process would be simultaneous. <br />She displayed the site layout on the overhead screen and pointed out the Canyon Creek <br />development, which had been there for some time. She described the proposed phasing <br />of the project and emphasized that this was only a conceptual plan at this time. She <br />stated that full architectural plans were not yet developed and that staff is requesting the <br />Commission’s comments regarding the overall project, height of the existing structure, <br />and the dome. She added that a church facility was conditionally allowed in Agriculture <br />zoning districts. She noted that domes and cupolas are also allowed but may not <br />comprise over ten percent of the building floor area. She noted that such projects <br />typically featured generous landscaping. <br /> <br />Ms. Decker noted that the Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project located at this site <br />and does not believe that the trips, which are off-peak, would warrant a traffic study. The <br />City has received numerous verbal and written concerns about traffic on Dublin Canyon <br />Road, and a request has been received from the public to have a traffic study prepared. <br />Staff has not determined whether that would be the case, and the Traffic Engineer has <br />indicated that the volumes related to this facility would be quite low and may not <br />necessitate a traffic study at this time, as would typically be shown by the model used. <br />The Planning Commission may wish to provide direction as to whether or not a traffic <br />study should be prepared. <br /> <br />In response to an inquiry by Commissioner O’Connor regarding the total square footage <br />of the footprint, Ms. Decker replied that it was approximately 14,000 square feet. <br /> <br />Commissioner O’Connor noted that the acreage was currently zoned for Low Density <br />Residential and inquired how many homes would be able to go on this site under the <br />General Plan. Ms. Decker replied that she believed that approximately four homes would <br />be supported, and two allowable homes on the County property would bring the total to <br />six. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 8, 2007 Page 4 of 24 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.