My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 082207
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
PC 082207
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:31:14 PM
Creation date
10/16/2007 3:39:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
8/22/2007
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.
/
20
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
Ms. Decker wished to emphasize that the architecture shown to the Planning Commission <br />was very preliminary. Whether the end product is attached or detached, staff would work <br />with the applicant to ensure each unit is unique, just as staff did on Peters Avenue. Staff <br />believed the overarching question should be whether the models should be detached or <br />attached. <br /> <br />Chairperson Fox preferred detached homes. <br /> <br />Commissioner O’Connor preferred detached homes in that part of town. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson preferred attached buildings and believed that if the homes were <br />custom-built detached homes, the cost of the homes would be driven up, eliminating any <br />affordability. <br /> <br />Ms. Decker noted that there had been much discussion about the sizes of the units and <br />that affordable units were generally between 1,200 and 1,500 square feet. However, staff <br />has found that size was not necessarily appropriate for families. <br /> <br />Mr. Carey inquired about the preferences for two-car garage versus tandem garage. <br /> <br />The Commissioners generally agreed that a tandem garage would be acceptable. <br /> <br />No action was taken. <br /> <br />c. PREV-650, Robert Wentworth <br /> <br />Work Session to review and receive comments on a preliminary review proposal <br />to subdivide an existing 6.04-acre parcel into three lots ranging from 1.54 acres to <br />2.75 acres in conformance with the Happy Valley Specific Plan, or to consider <br />increasing the number of lots up to eight, ranging from 9,200 square feet to <br />68,080 square feet. The project is located at 1157 Happy Valley Road and is <br />zoned PUD-SRDR (Planned Unit Development – Semi-Rural Density <br />Residential) District. <br /> <br />Ms. Decker wished to apologize to the applicant and the Planning Commission for the <br />erroneous wording in the legal description, which read “up to eight units.” She noted that <br />the description should have read “up to seven units.” <br /> <br />Ms. Amos summarized the staff report and described the background, scope and layout of <br />the proposed project. <br /> <br />Commissioner O’Connor noted that the staff report stated that the applicant would like to <br />amend the Happy Valley Specific Plan so that the subject site would be similar to the <br />Serenity at Callippe development. He believed the Serenity at Callippe development <br />required one home per two acres. <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 22, 2007 Page 16 of 20 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.