My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 041509
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2009
>
PC 041509
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 4:40:00 PM
Creation date
9/23/2009 8:44:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/15/2009
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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
considered, and whether or not this a strong enough value that it should not be <br />overridden by adding three more units to the project. He stated that he believed the <br />impacts are somewhat minimal with the exception of the experience with that corner <br />of the golf course. <br />Commissioner Blank indicated that this was one of the reasons the Commission had <br />requested a streetscape and a colored viewscape. <br />Chair Pearce agreed with Commission Blank that the Commission had asked for <br />streetscape and landscape plans. She stated that with plans that showed houses <br />with no trees around them or other structures for comparison or sense of place, it <br />was very difficult to make a determination of how this project will look from the golf <br />course or in conjunction with other developments. She added that without the <br />additional information she had requested, she would need to fall back on the HVSP. <br />Commissioner Blank stated that when he looked at the views he received for this <br />project as compared to the views from projects in the Downtown or Ponderosa, he <br />was surprised that staff had accepted this project submittal as complete. <br />Commissioner Narum stated that she did not disagree with the comments made by <br />Commissioner Blank and Chair Pearce but that she looked at this from a different <br />way. She noted that compared to the houses on the Mariposa subdivision, the <br />houses being proposed fronting the golf course is much improved in terms of the <br />setbacks and spacing in between the houses.She commented that it is distressing <br />to drive along Westbridge and see how close the houses are to one other and the <br />lack of green and openness which was really the intent. She stated that she was <br />happy with the project’s development standards. She added that the real issue is <br />that the developer is trying to get six lots on six acres with no provision for open <br />space. She indicated that she appreciates the changes made as a result of the last <br />workshop and that taking out one of the lots and creating an acre of open space <br />would help. <br />Commissioner Narum noted that the HVSP uses for the current designation <br />indicates “barn, coop, tank house, 50 mature fowl, rabbits, sheep, goats,” and she <br />indicated she was not sure this is what the City would want up against the golf <br />course. She added that if one looks at the setbacks in comparison to the semi-rural <br />zoning, which the applicant has met or exceeded, and in terms of the Mariposa <br />subdivision, this project is a good thing. She inquired if the findings could be made if <br />one lot is taken out and some open space created in its place. <br />Commissioner Blank stated that he felt this was a provocative idea. He added that it <br />was unfortunate that this item did not come back to the Commission as an additional <br />workshop and that the Commission would have to consider it as an application <br />Commissioner Pearce indicated that the Commission should review what is before it <br />and then pass on its recommendation to the City Council. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, April 15, 2009 Page 12 of 24 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.