My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
24 ATTACHMENT 4
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
060215
>
24 ATTACHMENT 4
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/18/2015 12:04:08 PM
Creation date
5/28/2015 8:06:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
6/2/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
24 ATTACHMENT 4
Document Relationships
24
(Message)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2015\060215
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
Mr. Landolf agreed. He stated that this is kind of the compromise. He indicated that to <br /> work in the contours, the house would have to be rotated farther away from the street. <br /> Commissioner O'Connor added that rotating it clockwise would require a lot more grading. <br /> Mr. Landolf said yes; and more stairs up to the front door and taller walls at the far right <br /> corner of the house. <br /> Commissioner Balch referred to the rendering of the house presented by the architect, and <br /> noting that the angle of the picture can cause differences, he pointed out that the third <br /> window facing the second floor is missing from the rendering. <br /> Mr. Landolf stated that he must have added it later on the elevations. <br /> Commissioner Balch further noted that the chimney on the first page extends to the <br /> pitch of the roof. He indicated that he does not believe there would be a significant <br /> difference in the pitch that one cannot see the top of the chimney sticking up. <br /> Mr. Landolf indicated that there are three other pictures of that same model with the <br /> chimney. <br /> Commissioner Nagler noted that there are actually two windows missing. <br /> Commissioner Balch stated that might be due to the angle. He indicated that if the <br /> house were rotated, the first window will be missing, but the top of the chimney on the <br /> back would be visible. He added that the reason he is bringing this up for the architect <br /> is because the massing obviously appears different. <br /> Commissioner O'Connor added that part of this can also be how close one is to the <br /> building: the further back one is, the more visible the windows and even the chimney <br /> would be. <br /> Commissioner Balch commented that this is a practical way of bringing the model and <br /> being able to turn it around far enough. <br /> Chair Allen stated that for clarification, if she were to compare the left elevation of the <br /> Planning Commission's copy of the layout with this rendering, one would not be seeing <br /> that same perspective and they are views from different angles; otherwise, the rotunda <br /> and the chimney would be visible, and it would look very different. <br /> Mr. Landolf agreed. He noted that elevations cannot be seen totally except for the <br /> architectural drawing. <br /> Chair Allen disclosed that she visited the site, talked to Mr. Monzo as well, and saw the <br /> photos discussed. She asked Mr. Landolf if there is anything they can do to help with <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, March 25, 2015 Page 4 of 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.