My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 06:182
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2006
>
SR 06:182
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/28/2006 4:49:46 PM
Creation date
9/14/2006 4:55:19 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
10/3/2006
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 06:182
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
199
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).
View images
View plain text
<br />ATIACHMENT 9 <br /> <br />PUD-50/PTR-7721. Ponderosa Homes <br />Work session to review and receive comment on an application to subdivide an approximately <br />19.83-acre site into 28 lots and to construct 26 new, one- and two-story single-family detached <br />homes ranging in size from 3,908 square feet to 4,595 square feet located at 3157 Trenery Drive <br />and 2313 Martin Avenue. Zoning for the property is PUD-LDR (Planned Unit Development- <br />Low Density Residential) District. <br /> <br />Ms. Decker summarized the staff report and described the history, layout, and scope of this project. <br />She noted that traffic calming was a significant issue, and staff had been directed to request that the <br />developer look into providing a curvilinear alignment along Cameron A venue. Staff did not support <br />creating a double frontage lot that would take traffic off of Cameron A venue, which would connect to <br />Martin A venue. She displayed and described several alternatives for the curvilinear alignments. <br />Ponderosa Homes had been particularly receptive to staff's proposal of separating the sidewalk with a <br />deeper parkway, although staff did not object to the more common parkway depth. <br /> <br />Pamela Hardy, Ponderosa Homes, noted that they had taken feedback from the neighbors for the past <br />year. She noted that the number of homes had been reduced from 28 to 25, and the square footage of <br />the homes had been reduced by 200 to 400 square feet. She noted that architectural changes had been <br />made and that the setbacks around the perimeters had been increased. A template conveyance along the <br />westbound property had been offered in recognition of the modest rear yard setbacks, which would triple <br />the setback from the new property boundary. The single-family homes were plotted around the <br />perimeters, and the number of lots around Cameron A venue was reduced from five to four lots. A <br />customized design along Cameron was created, providing garage access from the internal loop road and <br />minimizing the appearance of the garage doors. Ms. Hardy then displayed and described the different <br />architectural styles and choices. She noted that the neighbors found the original French Country style <br />to have too much mass, and it had been replaced with a cottage elevation. <br /> <br />In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Arkin regarding the sidewalk in front of the properties and <br />the easement, Ms. Decker replied that after the first workshop, the 28-foot wide road street section <br />precluded the opportunity to place a sidewalk along the Ketell property frontage. After direction <br />from the Department of Public Works, Traffic Safety, and Plarming Department, stafffelt it was <br />important to have a sidewalk and looked at a reasonable road width to determine whether a sidewalk <br />would fit. Alternative 4 proposed a sidewalk but reduced the width of Cameron Avenue. <br /> <br />Wes Jost noted that the street was currently 28 feet wide, and the existing subdivision to the south <br />had dedications to the current street. He noted that there was a 2.5-3-foot wide strip that was a public <br />right-of-way. The sidewalk would be placed in a combination where the current asphalt and <br />landowner's landscaping were located. <br /> <br />In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Pearce regarding pedestrian and bicycle safety on the <br />26-foot wide street, Mr. lost replied that it would allow for two 13-foot wide lanes. He noted that <br />bicycle lanes were not typically striped in residential neighborhoods, and he did not believe that <br />would be a problem on this street. If it did become an issue, a bike lane would require a six-foot wide <br />lane, which would not leave enough width on the street. <br /> <br />EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, May 10, 2006 <br /> <br />Page I of8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.