My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 021214
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2014
>
PC 021214
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 4:07:00 PM
Creation date
8/10/2017 4:02:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/12/2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
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
creek, which would require a fire truck -rated bridge, then come up a very significant <br />slope which would also require a lot of grading and the removal of a lot of trees. She <br />added that she is not certain if this is actually physically possible at any of those points. <br />Steve Kirkpatrick, City Engineer, stated that, in addition to what Ms. Stern has <br />mentioned, the roadway Mr. Win is referring to will require going about 1,000 feet up <br />that driveway, then across that seasonal creek with a bridge that is rated for a fire truck, <br />then construct a meandering road similar to the road proposed by staff. He added that <br />in addition to this physical access, there would be the utilities, such as water and sewer, <br />which will need to be brought all the way up in the same direction. He indicated that this <br />could be done, but there are challenges to be met, both environmental and costs. <br />Commissioner Pearce inquired if Ms. Harryman wanted to address other matters that <br />had not been already addressed with regard to the letter from the Mr. Flashman. <br />Ms. Harryman replied that she did not have anything specific to add, noting that <br />Ms. Soo did cover the main points about Measure PP and about the blobs. She added <br />that if the Commission had any specific questions or if any of the Commissioners <br />needed clarification, she would like to talk about it. <br />Mr. Dolan stated that the letter that says a lot of words, but it really has those two <br />points: the proposal does not comply with Measure PP, and the houses are not exactly <br />in the blobs. He explained that the Measure PP issue is pretty simple and is a little <br />surprising because it is not a complex concept: if a project does not have ten or more <br />lots, it is exempt; hence, Mr. Flashman's point is inaccurate. With respect to whether or <br />not the homes are precisely within the blob in the Specific Plan, Mr. Dolan agreed that <br />they are not. He indicated that staff believes there is some leeway and the blobs are <br />conceptual. He noted that this issue has been addressed before and has gone all the <br />way up to the City Council for its interpretation: the Council agreed with the <br />interpretation that the blobs are not precise locations and can be adjusted to address <br />certain situations. <br />Commissioner O'Connor referred to the slide showing where a house was actually built <br />as compared with the blob. He inquired if there are other homes that have already been <br />built in that area. <br />Ms. Stern replied that all the yellow dots on the map represent the actual position of the <br />existing homes at that time, as opposed to the asterisks which represent the blobs. She <br />noted that this is simply an illustration of the fact that there are limitations to the <br />accuracies of the blobs. <br />Commissioner O'Connor noted that he is trying to find how close the blobs are to the <br />other homes. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 12, 2014 Page 6 of 38 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.