My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 02/14/96
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
PC 02/14/96
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2013 11:52:26 AM
Creation date
2/23/2005 3:33:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/14/1996
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 2/14/96
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
<br />a small amount of major arterial improvements. They are asking not to be assessed a capital <br />. improvement fee. The one fee they are not wishing to reduce is the park fee. <br /> <br />In response to Commissioner Hovingh's statement that the original Spanish Oaks project had a <br />total of 219 units for the low and very low income, Mr. Sweeney advised that the current project <br />would have 116 comparable units. He went on to say that the 6.6 acres left could conceivably <br />have some low-income apartments built on it and the Signature project has a townhouse which <br />meets the moderate income levels of the City. <br /> <br />Mr. Sweeney advised Commissioner Barker that when the Spanish Oaks project was replaced by <br />the Signature project, it was agreed that they would work with the City to try and develop a <br />community park, but it was not a condition of approval to that project. The land was rezoned <br />with a condition of approval for a 5 acre park. They are offering in their current proposal a 6.6 <br />acre park. <br /> <br />Bill Barber, corporate counsel for Spanos Corporation, stated he is opposed to Condition 6, <br />which states that if the City would want a portion of Lot 60 for a community park within the next <br />three months, this development plan would be null and void. He stated that it is poor business <br />practice to buy a piece of land and accept a site plan which may become useless in three months' <br />time. Their objection is hereby formally entered in public record. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Commissioner Barker asked if the applicants would support a continuance of this matter until <br />after the decision of the City Council. Mr. Barber did not think a continuance was necessary and <br />is not suggesting the Commission must remove Condition 6; he is simply stating his objection to <br />the condition. <br /> <br />David Israel, project architect, 1660 Bush, San Francisco, stated they have worked closely with <br />staff to try and address all concerns. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wright inquired where the car wash area would be located and whether there <br />would be more than one car wash area for 462 units. Mr. Israel deferred to Tom Allen. <br /> <br />In response to Commissioner Hovingh, Mr. Beougher advised that the Gatewood apartments <br />moved the location of the car wash area. <br /> <br />Tom Allen, A. G. Spanos Corporation, advised that they have not determined where and how <br />many car wash areas can be located in the project. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hovingh stated his concern about the large number of Canary Island Pines and <br />that disease or weather conditions could kill all the landscape. He inquired if the applicants <br />would increase the species of plant material used. Mr. Allen stated he would agree to having <br />mOTe varieties, however, the Hacienda Owner's Association dictates what type of plant material <br />is to be installed. He stated that Canary lsland Pines have proven to be less susceptible to <br />disease. Mr. Iserson believes there would be DO problem in changing some of the Canary Island <br />Pines to other tree species. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br /> <br />Page 8 <br /> <br />February 14, 1996 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.