My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
06 ATTACHMENT 6
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2016
>
092016
>
06 ATTACHMENT 6
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/30/2016 11:37:54 AM
Creation date
9/15/2016 3:50:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
9/20/2016
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
06
Document Relationships
06
(Message)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2016\092016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
53
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
Beaudin: I'm not sure that I would try and regulate the structures with this language. For <br />me there are paint tanks and other things that have kind of been strewed about and <br />there's outdoor storage of materials. <br />Commissioner Balch: Why don't we adopt something similar to that for garages? <br />Beaudin: What I would say is that if you're concerned about multiple buildings, then <br />maybe set a maximum of up to three or four, or one accessory structure and then <br />beyond that, they would need to come to the City to make sure they look consistent, are <br />sited appropriately, there's landscape screening perhaps, so they would get a permit. <br />Commissioner O'Connor: So we could restate the code by saying anything over 120 <br />square feet or any combination more than three structures need to be permitted. <br />Commissioner Balch: 120 square feet is already there. <br />Commissioner O'Connor: Yes, but you don't want to say three and they go out there <br />and they do one that's 200. We don't want to eliminate these. I think to say, "Any <br />accessory structure over 120 square feet or any combination of structures more than <br />three or four must obtain a permit." <br />Commissioner Balch: May I suggest an alternate? How about no more than two <br />ancillary structures ?" <br />Commissioner O'Connor: Yes, but any one over 120 square feet is in the code. <br />Commissioner Allen: You know, I'm just feeling like we're nitpicking and I mean, to me, <br />the propane tanks and the lighter fluid that's in the backyard is more concerning to me <br />than these structures if they're by code. I would sort of say 44 conceptually covers it— <br />"The applicant shall maintain the site in a clean and orderly manner." I would request <br />the City work with the applicant to identify where there are gaps where it's not clean and <br />orderly and get those resolved in the next 30 days or something. <br />Chair Ritter: I agree. <br />Commissioner Balch: I'm fine with that. <br />Beaudin: Accessory structures I would say are different than 44. If the idea is to get <br />things looking neat and tidy up there.... <br />Commissioner Allen:....and safe in terms of the propane tanks. <br />Commissioner Balch: Maybe I could do it differently —could we say no accessory <br />structures in the buffer zone? Or are we okay with it? <br />Chair Ritter: That's actually a good spot to put it. <br />Commissioner O'Connor: That would actually say they can't have any because the west <br />and north sides are buffer zones. <br />EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, June 22, 2016 Page 50 of 52 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.