My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC-92-15
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
PC-92-15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/15/2006 9:33:50 AM
Creation date
4/20/2005 3:14:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
2/12/1992
DOCUMENT NO
PC-92-15
DOCUMENT NAME
PUD-89-17
NOTES
CURRIN CONSTRUCTION/OAK TREE FARM
NOTES 3
68 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES
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 />10. Country T .line <br /> <br />IMPACT: The Commission finds that construction of two-story homes along the northern <br />property line would limit views of the hillside from residences along Country Lane and impact <br />the rear yard privacy of residents. The construction of larger, two-story homes at higher <br />elevations would provide a visual contrast to existing residential neighborhoods. <br /> <br />DEGREE: <br /> <br />Significant. <br /> <br />FINDING: The Commission finds that implementation of mitigation measures which limit <br />homes along the northern property line to one-story in height, with roof pitches of 6: 12 to <br />maintain a "low-profile" silhouette, site-specific landscaping for vegetative screening along the <br />northern property line and architectural guidelines which locate building envelopes towards the <br />front of the lot are feasible and have been incorporated into the project design or into the project <br />by reference through conditions of approval, and will be effective in reducing the visual impacts <br />of this project to a less than significant level. These measures are Sf, 5g, 5h, 5i (second portion <br />- architectural design guidelines [5q, 5r, 5s and 5t), 5j and 50 of the Final SEIR, pages 5-17, <br />5-18, 5-26, and 5-21 through 5-23. <br /> <br />Vegetation and Wildlife Impacts <br /> <br />1. Heritae:e tree loss due to develo.pment <br /> <br />IMPACT: The Planning Commission finds that heritage tree loss due to development could <br />be a significant impact if it were necessary to remove more trees than indicated in preliminary <br />grading and development plans, and that heritage trees may be damaged or destroyed during <br />construction and grading by inappropriate techniques for protecting heritage trees. <br /> <br />DEGREE: <br /> <br />Significant. <br /> <br />FINDING: The Planning Commission finds that with the implementation of mitigation <br />measures designed to ensure protection of heritage trees during grading and construction <br />activities (MM 6a and 6d), limiting the removal of heritage trees for development ~ to three <br />(MM 6b), and ensuring proper protection of trees during the grading and construction of <br />individual lots and custom homes (MM 6f) and ensuring adequate protection from over-watering <br />(MM 6g), impacts of development on heritage trees are feasible and have been incorporated into <br />the project design or into the project by reference through conditions of approval, and will be <br />effective in reducing the impacts of this project to a less than significant level. <br /> <br />2. HeritaL!e tree loss due to landslide reoair <br /> <br />IMPACT: The Planning Commission finds that heritage tree loss due to landslide repair <br />could have a potentially significant biological (and visual) impact. <br /> <br />-8- <br /> <br />- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.