Laserfiche WebLink
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON <br /> <br /> ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA <br /> <br /> RESOLUTION NO. 93-08 <br /> <br /> RESOLUTION DENYING THE APPEAL (AP-92-21) OF A <br /> DECISION OF THEDESIGNREVIEWBOARDAND ZONING <br /> ADMINISTRATOR AND UPHOLDING APPROVAL OF THE <br /> APPLICATION OF DUANE TASH FOR A TWO-STORY <br /> ADDITION TO THE HOME AT 4922 BLACK AVENUE <br /> (Z-92-221) <br /> <br />WHEREAS, zoning for the property is R-1-6500 (Single-Family <br /> Residential - Minimum Lot Size of 6,500 Square Feet); and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, on October 27, 1992, the Zoning Administrator approved a <br /> 960 square foot second-story addition to an existing <br /> single-story home located at 4922 Black Avenue; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, that decision was appealed by John Schmit, et al. to the <br /> Design Review Board and on December 8, 1992, the Design <br /> Review Board approved a revised house design and thereby <br /> denied the appeal; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, within the time specified by the Pleasanton Municipal <br /> Code, John Schmit, et al. appealed that decision to the <br /> City Council of the City of Pleasanton; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the City Council on <br /> January 19, 1993, at which time all pertinent testimony <br /> and documents were reviewed; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the City Council, on the basis of substantial evidence in <br /> the record finds as follows: <br /> <br /> 1. The proposed addition conforms to all the required <br /> development standards of the R-1-6500 zoning <br /> district in which it is located, including <br /> setbacks, height limits and floor area ratio <br /> limits. <br /> <br /> 2. The revised architectural design, which <br /> incorporates wood siding on the addition, is <br /> attractive and compatible with the existing <br /> structure. <br /> <br /> 3. The structure height, the setback of the proposed <br /> addition, and the setbacks of homes on adjoining <br /> properties minimizes sunlight and privacy impacts. <br /> <br /> 4. Other potential privacy impacts will be mitigated <br /> with landscaping (Condition #3), to which the <br /> applicant and a neighbor have agreed. <br /> <br /> <br />