My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 05:069A
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2005
>
SR 05:069A
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2005 1:59:43 PM
Creation date
3/10/2005 1:00:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
3/15/2005
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 05:069A
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
89
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
Ms. Dennis referred to the design and Planning Commission approval of each <br />individual house. When it goes to the Planning Commission, has that been reviewed by <br />the peer reviewer? <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said there is not peer review of individual houses, only when a <br />particular house does not meet the design guidelines or is particularly noteworthy in some <br />negative way. There have only been two or three since the peer review process has been <br />instituted. He did not anticipate that peer review would be required. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis asked if the function of the Planning Commission would be to <br />determine whether the design of the house is consistent with the design guidelines. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said the Planning Commission would have discretion on such things as <br />privacy issues, window placement, height of the building, etc. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti asked if there would be a thorough review of the project by staff <br />before it goes to the Planning Commission. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said it would be a regular design review item, with a noticed public <br />hearing, etc. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti asked if the fencing would be open fencing as is proposed for the <br />Happy Valley area. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift indicated the design guidelines call for open fencing. <br /> <br />Mayor Tarver declared the public hearing open. <br /> <br /> Hoss Bozorgzad, 488 Sycamore Road, reviewed the history of his application to <br />this point. He objected to having the house design reviewed by the Planning Commission. <br />He and the planning staff worked hard to develop two sets of design guidelines for the <br />Agricultural and Residential lots. He believed the required review of the house plans <br />would cause further unnecessary delays in the project. He agreed with the staff report <br />with two exceptions. He would like to have construction allowed on Saturday so long as <br />the Greenbriar project continues. Secondly, he has children in the local school and is <br />aware of the situation. However, because he has been waiting for five years due to delays <br />that were not under his control, he asked Council to approve the Planning Commission <br />recommendation to allow him to have a building permit prior to completion of the new <br />elementary school. He believes over the past five years, the best plan has been developed <br />for this property and he asked Council to approve the application. <br /> <br />Earl Bach, 446 Sycamore Road, supported the application of Mr. Bozorgzad. <br /> <br /> Gail Olney, 5855 San Juan Way, did not oppose the application of Mr. <br />Bozorgzad, however she did want to make certain the pathway will be completed. She <br />indicated she had 40 signatures of her neighbors supporting this. She wants to keep the <br /> <br />Excerpt from the City Council Meeting Minutes of 9/20/99 2 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.