My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
3_Exhibits A & C-F
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2010-2019
>
2019
>
08-28
>
3_Exhibits A & C-F
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/20/2019 4:43:48 PM
Creation date
8/20/2019 4:43:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
8/28/2019
Document Relationships
3
(Message)
Path:
\BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\AGENDA PACKETS\2010-2019\2019\08-28
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
43
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
PUD-133, Saravana Chilla <br /> Workshop to review and receive comments on an application for Planned Unit <br /> Development approval to demolish an existing home and construct three new detached <br /> single-family homes and related improvements at 3987 Stanley Boulevard. Zoning for <br /> the property is PUD-HDR (Planned Unit Development — High Density Residential) <br /> District. <br /> Associate Planner Jennifer Hagen presented the specifics of the item in the Agenda Report. <br /> Commissioner Pace inquired about the renderings, proposed height and color scheme. <br /> Ms. Hagen stated there are attached townhomes to the west which are all two stories and 25 <br /> feet in height. Staff is still working with the applicant on the color scheme which will eventually <br /> be consistent with what is in the area, and the applicant will have a final color and materials <br /> board for the final Commission meeting as well as conditions of approval that require the final <br /> colors painted on site to be reviewed and approved by the staff at the time of construction. <br /> Commissioner Brown referenced the driveway orientation and asked if it was to preserve the <br /> Valley Oak tree. He then inquired about Lot 1 not conforming to the design guidelines for the <br /> downtown. <br /> Ms. Hagen responded that it was important to retain the Valley Oak tree. Also, staff would <br /> prefer a wrap-around porch on Lot 1 for a better-defined elevation. Staff and the design <br /> guidelines encourage the home and front door to face the street and look more like a front <br /> facing home, and staff is looking to the Commission for comment. <br /> Commissioner Pace asked what the purpose was for orienting the front door to face Stanley <br /> Boulevard. <br /> Mr. Beaudin responded that per the City's design guidelines, the front door should be oriented <br /> towards the street or public right-of-way to denote the front of the house. <br /> Commissioner Pace inquired about the front door on the townhomes and asked whether they <br /> face the street or the courtyard. <br /> Ms. Hagen responded that since the townhomes were not a detached single-family home <br /> product, but are three to four unit attached townhomes, she did not believe they face the front. <br /> In addition, the townhomes are set back further at 25 feet from the street versus 18 feet as with <br /> this project, and they all face the interior courtyard. <br /> Mr. Beaudin added that it is site specific and he thinks the grade changes and orientation of <br /> the building offer flexibility. <br /> Commissioner Ritter inquired whether the City has a color palette as a standard. <br /> Ms. Hagen responded no; the City does not. <br /> Commissioner Ritter asked if the City has a definition of massing. <br /> Excerpt: Planning Commission Minutes, June 12, 2019 Page 1 of 5 <br />nning Commission's feedback on the Stanley Boulevard elevation of the home on Lot 1 <br /> and all building, design, colors, and materials. <br /> Discussion Point#2 <br /> 2. Does the Planning Commission support the proposed building positioning, massing and <br /> home designs including architecture, colors, and materials? <br /> Conclusion Discussion Point#3 <br /> 3. What other information would assist the Commission in its decision on the proposal? Do <br /> you have any other comments on the project? <br /> PUD-133, 3987 Stanley Boulevard Planning Commission <br /> 10 of 11 <br />any items it wishes to be addressed before the project application <br /> is formally presented to the Planning Commission. The first two questions below are topical <br /> PUD-133, 3987 Stanley Boulevard Planning Commission <br /> 9 of 11 <br />s <br /> equipment, oil, gas, chemicals, harmful materials, fill or storage. <br /> PUD-133 Planning Commission <br /> Page 17 of 18 <br />rading or subdivision permit, whichever occurs first. The City will retain the cash <br /> deposit until all work is substantially complete, all areas are stabilized, and all hazards are <br /> mitigated to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering/City Engineer. <br /> PUD-133 Planning Commission <br /> Page 13 of 18 <br /> Page 12 of 18 <br />S: <br /> The applicant's California licensed geotechnical engineer shall inspect and approve the <br /> PUD-133 Planning Commission <br /> Page 9 of 18 <br />