My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 2000-10
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
PC 2000-10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/15/2006 9:32:44 AM
Creation date
8/15/2001 5:38:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
2/9/2000
DOCUMENT NO
PC 2000-10
DOCUMENT NAME
PUD-82-19-6M
NOTES
Garcia/Wagner
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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 CITY OF PLEASANTON <br />ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA <br /> RESOLUTION NO. PC-2000-10 <br /> <br />RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPLICATION OF GARCIA/WAGNER AND <br />ASSOCIATES (FOR PACIFIC BELL) FOR DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL, AS <br />FILED UNDER CASE PUD-82-19-6M <br /> <br />Garcia/Wagner and Associates (for Pacific Bell) has applied for a PUD (Planned <br />Unit Development) major modification to allow (1) the construction of a new <br />administrative building which is proposed to be approximately 4,000 square feet <br />in size and 19 feet tall (including the roof equipment screen); (2) the construction <br />of approximately 36 new parking stalls; and (3) the addition of landscaping on site <br />located at 7240 Johnson Drive; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, zoning for the property is PUD-G&LI (Planned Unit Development-General <br /> Industrial and Light Industrial) District; and <br /> <br />at its duly noticed public heating of February 9, 2000, the Planning Commission, <br />after considering all public testimony, relevant exhibits, and recommendations of <br />the City staff concerning this application, approved the Negative Declaration <br />prepared for this application; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made the following PUD findings: <br /> <br />The plan is in the best interest of the public health, safety, and general <br />welfare. <br /> <br />The project, as conditioned meets all applicable City standards concerning public, <br />health, safety, and welfare, e.g., vehicle access, geologic hazards, and flood <br />baTards. The proposed development has been designed to be compatible with <br />adjacent induslrial uses and is consistent with all General Plan policies. Adequate <br />storm drain, sanitary sewer, and water service facilities are present in the area <br />surrounding this infill site. The project would include the installation of on-site <br />utility connections to municipal systems in the City street necessary to serve the <br />office building. The proposed infrastructure connections would not adversely <br />affect services to the existing or surrounding businesses or properties. <br /> <br />2. The plan is consistent with the City's Oeneral Plan. <br /> <br />The plan would allow the development of a partially vacant, underutilized <br />property within an existing urban area, provide for office development which is <br />within environmental constraints, and ensure development is compatible with <br />surrounding properties in the area. The proposed 13% floor area ratio is less than <br />the density that would be allowed on similar types of properties and is less than <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.