My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 020911
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2011
>
PC 020911
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 3:14:47 PM
Creation date
4/20/2011 4:01:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/9/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
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
noted that if space can be created through the elimination of at least one or two units, a <br />better design might allow saving the more marginal trees slated for removal. <br /> <br />Chair Narum agreed and supported the priority to save the healthier heritage trees, <br />given a re-design. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank noted that developers are asked to replace a tree being removed <br />with another, or contribute toward the cost of it in another location. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pearce stated that staff does not believe there is adequate room to do <br />that on this lot, but this may be possible with the reduction of a unit or two. <br /> <br />stated that if the Commission wants the development to move <br />forward, the DTSP envisions sometimes removing a tree that is in good shape as long <br />as there is a good trade-off. He added that this does not mean removing every tree but <br />noted there are exceptions that can be made. <br /> <br />9. Does the Commission wish to make any suggestions regarding the house type, <br />sizes, height, setbacks, FARs, or design? <br /> <br />Commissioner Pentin noted that FARs and density have been discussed, and given the <br /> He added, however, <br />that if the house were saved, then the architecture was not right. <br /> <br />voiced support as well, but indicated that he would also <br />support a plan for attached homes. <br /> <br />Chair Narum stated that her only comment is that there are two homes with rear yard <br />setbacks of seven feet along the railroad tracks. She indicated that she would like <br />these increased to ten feet to be consistent with those on the east side. <br /> <br />The Commissioners agreed. <br /> <br />10. If the location of the open space parcel remains as is currently proposed, should <br />the location and species of the new trees and tall-growing shrubs planted in the <br />open space parcel be selected to prevent shading impacts on th <br />PV panels? <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank noted that this would be difficult to discuss without the new design. <br /> <br />11. Should the applicant further modify the project to reduce shading impacts on the <br />? <br /> <br />Commissioner Pentin stated that he would hope s are <br />addressed by the developer when the plan is returned; however, he noted that in order <br />for open space to be useable in the summertime, some trees are needed. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MINUTES, February 9, 2011 Page 19 of 41 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.