PC 031208 - Laserfiche WebLink

feet. She requested an explanation of that discrepancy. Ms. Soo noted that the option was to have low density residential with a 15,000-square-foot or a 12,000-square-foot minimum lot size. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Margo Layton, applicant, described the background of this proposed project and noted that over 2,600 square feet of their land was needed for a collector road. She noted that they made life easier for the City and the Sycamore Heights development by agreeing to a lot line adjustment. She noted that allowed for the new Sycamore Road. She noted that the change made it apparent to her that the acre along Sycamore Creek Way had more in common with the Sycamore Heights development than her other two acres; it was surrounded on three sides by LDR and became a wide, shallow lot. She noted that dividing the acre into three lots would create uniform lots with evenly increasing pad elevations. She noted that Lot 3 was cut slightly high so they did not go under the existing legacy sycamore trees. Their goal was to create homes that would complement the existing Sycamore Heights homes in size, style, and color. She noted that the extra dirt from the adj acent lots could be used, rather than offhauling dirt with trucks and trailers through the streets of Pleasanton, followed by hauling more dirt back in. Ms. Layton noted that it was not easy requesting additional density when many of the residents wanted fewer homes. She believed this prof ect would improve the continuity and flow of the style and size of the houses along Sycamore Creek Road. She believed it would utilize existing roads and infrastructure with minimal impact on the community. She noted that the area was designed to accommodate more houses than were built. She did not want to change the semi-rural feel of the community, but wished to complete it. She noted that they were able to install utilities at the time the other homes were built so they would not have to tear up the road at a later time. She noted that they had no plans to alter the existing zoning or density of the two-plus acres off Sycamore Road, which would remain agricultural, with no change to the feel of the neighborhood or any increase in traffic beyond that which was already allowed. With respect to lot size, she noted that staff agreed that there was only a minor discrepancy in lot size, which was determined by lining up the fences of the Sycamore Heights homes above and below their project. She would like to retain a straight, clean fence line, and pushing the fence into Lot 2 would place it below the drip line of the heritage sycamore tree, which they would like to avoid. She noted that Lot 3 was larger than the 15,000 square foot limit because their neighbor's existing sycamore impacted the visible area on the lot. The average square footage of all three lots was just over 14,793 square feet, which was very close to 15,000 square feet. She wished to remind the Commission that they had donated land to the City for the construction of the new collector road. She noted that because the restrictions on Lot 1 were beyond her control, staff had assured her that they would be able to retain it as a one-acre agriculturally zoned lot. She noted that when combined with Lot 2, these agriculturally designated lots were well over the minimum one acre. Ms. Layton noted that the response from the neighbors had generally been positive and understood that people who opposed items usually wrote to City staff. She submitted copies of correspondence that was positive and noted that no speakers who opposed the prof ect were in attendance. She wished to assure the residents along Sycamore Road that they did not intend to PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 12, 2008 Page 17 of 22