My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
1930
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
1980-1989
>
1980
>
1930
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/18/2008 2:21:06 PM
Creation date
6/27/2008 10:02:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
12/10/1980
DOCUMENT NO
1930
DOCUMENT NAME
PUD-80-12
NOTES
WILLIAM S. LAIDLEY
NOTES 2
DEVELOP 54 ACRE SITE
NOTES 3
FOOTHILL ROAD
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
PLANNING COMMISSION <br />CITY OF PLEASANTON <br />COUNTY OF ALAMEDA <br />STATE OF CALIFORNIA <br />RESOLUTION NO. 1930 <br />A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY <br />OF PLEASANTON RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A HILLSIDE <br />PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR WILLIAM S. LAIDLEY AS FILED <br />UNDER CASE PUD-80-12. <br />WHEREAS, William S. Laidley (by Art Dunkley, Castlewood Properties) <br />has applied for development plan approval £or a Hillside <br />Planned Development for the 54 acre site located on the <br />west side of Foothill Road, north of Bernal Avenue for <br />a 24-lot, single-family residential development; and <br />WHEREAS, the property is zoned HPD (Hillside Planned Development) <br />District; and <br />WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on December 10, 1980 by the <br />Planning Commission at which time all public input and <br />documents were reviewed; and <br />WHEREAS, the Planning Commission discussed the open space require- <br />ments and density required by the HPD Ordinance. <br />NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: <br />Section 1. Because of the overall steepness of the property, <br />the HPD Ordinance allows a density of only one unit per <br />5 acres on the site. This would amount to 11 units on <br />the 54 acre subject property. To justify the higher <br />density requested, an adjustment to the HPD W.I.S. <br />factor is recommended because the following findings <br />can be made: <br />1. the existence of amenities or on-site or off-site <br />improvements which are not normally found or required <br />;n residential developments: and <br />the existence of a topographical feature, including <br />but not limited to a cliff or deep ravine or extensive <br />land area over 25~ slope of a magnitude which causes <br />the W.I.S. to be significantly greater than would be <br />the case if the topographic feature was not considered. <br />Section 2. The Planning Commission recommends approval of case <br />PUD-80-12, a Hillside Planned Development, subject to <br />the following conditions: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.