My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 11/08/1995
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
PC 11/08/1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/10/2017 3:58:08 PM
Creation date
3/30/2005 2:40:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
11/8/1995
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 11/08/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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 />In response to Chairman Lutz, Mr. Iserson noted that on Page 11, 4th paragraph a few <br />words were left off. Basically, the approval of encroaching into the PSE is being left up to <br />the Commission. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wright inquired if the three foot articulation would be better than having a <br />straight wall. Mr. Cannon feels the variety of the articulation would be better. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED <br /> <br />Ken Crews, Signature Properties, 6612 Owens Drive, is comfortable with the conditions of <br />approval except for two items -- encroachment into the PSE, would agree to a maximum <br />length of 120' of wall, and Condition 3 regarding distribution of staff report and conditions <br />of approval to home buyers. They would not like to do this because it causes confusion, and <br />they would notice buyers that they can review conditions at the City offices. Mr. Iserson <br />also agreed with the concern of Mr. Crews regarding distribution of the conditions of <br />approval. The more important issues are included in the CC&Rs. <br /> <br />Commissioner Barker asked if the applicants had a drawing showing the parking. No <br />drawing was available depicting the parking, however, Mr. Crews stated the guest parking <br />ratio exceeds the guest parking ratio on the approved plan. This proposal had a ratio of 3.85 <br />spaces per unit. <br /> <br />Jim Ghielmetti, 6612 Owens Drive, addressed Commissioner Barker's previous inquiry about <br />park fees. He stated they are not seeking a rebate on park fees; all Hacienda projects have <br />their own separate recreation elements. They are waiting for a final decision to be made by <br />Prudential and the City as to where the park can be developed in this area. All park fees are <br />in escrow accounts. <br /> <br />In response to Commissioner McGuirk, Mr. Ghielmetti advised that they changed their <br />original plans due to a change in marketability. Regarding the soundwall, he advised that <br />staff interprets the Code to require a soundwall for any single-family detached development. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hovingh noted that Condition 12-I-ii provides for wooden flanking <br />soundwalls. He would prefer that this portion also be of masonry because he feels the wood <br />would have a short lifetime. Mr. Ghielmetti commented that any precast fencing would be <br />acceptable to them. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hovingh also noted he is concerned that there will be affordability within the <br />development. Mr. Ghielmetti advised that even though more money is involved for the <br />purchase of land, it is cheaper to build single family homes versus multifamily units because <br />of the building code requirements on multifamily units. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br /> <br />Page 17 <br /> <br />November 8, 1995 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.