My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 01/08/1992
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
PC 01/08/1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/29/2017 4:24:14 PM
Creation date
5/25/2005 1:34:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
1/8/1992
DOCUMENT NAME
01/08/1992
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 />Brian Lynch, 611 Windmill Lane, represented the application. H concurred with the staff <br />conditions and also with the two new conditions. He asked for a larification of Condition <br />10 regarding the height of the fence. He understood that the 8 ft. ould not have to extend <br />the full length of the fence and this has been agreed to by the neig bor. <br /> <br />Peter MacDonald, 400 Main Street, Pleasanton, commended the C ausens and Lynchs for <br />working so well together. He asked that the Commission approve the conditions as put forth <br />in Exhibit B, along with the new conditions. <br /> <br />David Clausen, 617 Windmill Lane, stated they are in agreement ith staff conditions and <br />with the new conditions. He said he has spoken to a number of n ighbors last week and they <br />indicated agreement for approval of the application. <br /> <br />Chairman Mahern clarified that once the stove is removed the use <br />valid. Mr. Swift agreed that once the stove is removed the unit <br /> <br />nnit will no longer be <br />no longer be rented. <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br /> <br /> <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Hovingh, seconded by Co missioner McGuirk <br />approving Case UP-91-85 subject to the 10 conditions listed in E ibit B and the two <br />presented tonight by staff, along with the following modification: <br /> <br />o That Condition 10 be modified to allow the 8 ft. fe ce to be extended as far as <br />necessary to retain a proper attractive balance. <br /> <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br /> <br />AYES: <br />NOES: <br />ABSENT: <br />ABSTAIN: <br /> <br />Commissioners Horan, Hovingh, McGuirk, Michel tti, and Chairman Mahern <br />None <br />None <br />None <br /> <br />Resolution No. PC-92-3 was entered and adopted approving Case -91-85 as motioned. <br /> <br /> <br />AP-91-12/Z-91-86. Mr. and Mrs. Doul!las Brobst <br />(Appellant: Planning Comm;ll.sion) <br />Appeal of a decision of the Design Review board approving th <br />Mrs. Douglas Brobst for design review approval to construct a approximately 6,324 <br />square foot single-family residence on a 42,300 square foot (0. 7 acre) lot located at <br />2094 Valley Oak Court (Golden Eagle Farm II, Tract 6033, 26). Zoning for the <br />property is PUD (Planned Unit Development) - Low Density R idential District. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift presented the staff report recommending denial of the a peal. <br /> <br />Minutes Planning Commission <br />January 8, 1992 <br /> <br />Page 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.