My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 10/11/1995
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
PC 10/11/1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/10/2017 3:57:54 PM
Creation date
3/30/2005 2:37:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/11/1995
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 10/11/1995
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 />Staff believes that the proposed PUD development plan is an interim plan which will <br />accommodate the development of the property in a manner consistent with the North <br />Sycamore Specific Plan. As such, staff recommends approval of the subject application to <br />the City Council subject to the conditions in Exhibit "B." <br /> <br />Commissioner Hovingh noted that there is an existing well on the 1.33 acre parcel and <br />inquired if the well should be sealed. Mr. Iserson thought that would be possible. Mr. <br />Beougher advised the issue of requiring a subdivision to relinquish their water rights is <br />questionable. It has been so conditioned on past PUDs. <br /> <br />Commissioner Barker inquired what the General Plan Update recommended for lot size in <br />this area. Mr. Iserson stated the Specific Plan calls for 15,000 square foot parcels. It was <br />noted that the General Plan Update did not change the North Sycamore area. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED <br /> <br />Ron Archer, 4133 Mohr Avenue, Suite E, representing Mr. Humphreys, emphasized that this <br />application is for financing purposes only and asked for an approval recommendation to the <br />City Council. <br /> <br />Al Spotomo, P.O. Box 487, stated that he has no objection to this application. Regarding <br />the East/West collector street, he asked that some flexibility be built into the criteria of the <br />home design/clustering to mitigate hardships between neighborhoods/developments. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED <br /> <br />Regarding the well on the 1.33 acre parcel, Mr. Archer does not believe the applicant has <br />thought about capping it. He feels it is used solely for irrigation. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wright motioned, seconded by Commissioner McGuirk, making the PUD <br />findings and recommending approval of PUD-95-05 to the City Council, subject to the <br />conditions listed in Exhibit "B." <br /> <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br /> <br />AYES: <br />NOES: <br />ABSENT: <br />ABSTAIN: <br /> <br />Commissioners Barker, Hovingh, McGuirk, Wright and Chairman Lutz <br />None <br />None <br />None <br /> <br />Resolution No. PC-95-79 was entered recommending approval of Case PUD-95-05 to the <br />City Council, as motioned. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br /> <br />Page 13 <br /> <br />October 11, 1995 <br /> <br />. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.