My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 042810
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2010
>
PC 042810
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 3:14:47 PM
Creation date
4/19/2011 3:20:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/28/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
b. PUD-87-19-03M – Dr. William & Lydia Yee and Marty Inderbitzen <br />Application for a major modification to an approved Planned Unit <br />Development to allow four custom lots, where six were previously <br />approved,onan approximately 29.8-acre site, custom lot design <br />guidelines, and off-site construction and access realignment on Foothill <br />Road located at 4100 Foothill Road. Zoning for the property is zoned <br />PUD-LDR/RDR/OS (Planned Unit Development – Low Density <br />Residential/Rural Density Residential/Open Space) District. <br />Also consider the Negative Declaration prepared for the project. <br />Marion Pavan presented the staff report and described the scope, layout, and key <br />elements of the project. <br />Commissioner Pentin inquired if roosting bats were those known for occupying rock <br />overhangs and crevices. <br />Mr. Pavan said yes. He added that they primarily occupy nests built into trees and <br />rocks. <br />Mr. Pavan noted staff and the applicants worked closely together to make the project <br />work. He added that staff has attached a recommended change to Condition No. 60 <br />which both the applicant and staff concur with, and recommended that it be <br />incorporated into the motion, in addition to some clerical corrections made to Tables 2 <br />and 3. <br />Mr. Dolan stated that staff had the unfortunate experience of receiving environmental <br />comments after the Planning Commission hearing, which staff believed should be <br />addressed prior to having the project go before the City Council. He added that the <br />comments received resulted in the project as described in the staff report. He noted <br />that the two largest issues they struggled with are the loss of oak woodland trees and <br />impacts to the ditch related to the bike lane. He noted that the impact of the <br />construction of the ditch was under-estimated, as the agency was requiring that the City <br />move the ditch up the hill. He indicated that in order to accomplish this and keep the <br />grades correct, there would be a lot of grading, and all trees along the road would have <br />to be removed, which would have resulted in an appearance that would be very different <br />than what the Commission was anticipating.He added that this was the primary reason <br />the project is returning to the Commission. <br />Mr. Dolan stated that only 200 linear feet of the total 1200 linear feet in bike lane would <br />be lost, and while this is not ideal, the project is providing 1,000 linear feet of bike lane. <br />Commissioner Pentin commented that the 200 linear feet where the bike lane would be <br />lost is probably where the most critical need is, and his concern is that this will not <br />change in the future. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, April 28, 2010 Page 3 of 15 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.