My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 02/26/1992
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
PC 02/26/1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/29/2017 4:24:46 PM
Creation date
5/25/2005 1:56:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/26/1992
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 02/26/1992
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 />~ regulations. He stated that the applicant feels that. infrastructure co ts do not allow for only a <br />three-lot development as suggested by staff. He commented that hi client is out of town a <br />lot as she is a postal inspector. <br /> <br />Commissioner Horan noted that the Commission is in favor of ha . g only three lots on the <br />site. He asked Mr. Farrell if his applicant would attempt to develo only three lots. Mr. <br />Farrell replied that his client feels three lots would not be economi ly feasible, but could <br />not say that she would definitely not consider it. His client has h the land about one year <br />and has someone living in the small farmhouse. <br /> <br /> <br />Chairman Mahem asked Mr. Farrell if the applicant plans to live i the farmhouse at some <br />point in time. Mr. Farrell thought that was the case. <br /> <br />Commissioner McGuirk discussed with Mr. Farrell whether the in nt of the client is to <br />renovate the existing farmhouse or remove it and put up a different one. Mr. Farrell said <br />that the client had intended to renovate the farmhouse simply becau of it being quite an old <br />structure and had felt this is what the Commission would have prefi rred. However, she was <br />not opposed to tearing it down and starting over. <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br /> <br />Commissioner Michelotti recalled that discussions at previous mee ngs did not support the <br />idea of three larger homes and one small house. She felt that three houses of similar size <br />would be more feasible. <br /> <br /> <br />larger homes and <br />On the other hand he <br />odate three larger homes <br /> <br />Commissioner McGuirk thought it would be more feasible to have <br />one small one on the site, rather than four of the same size house. <br />could conceive of moving the lot lines around somewhat to accom <br />and a cottage-type home with the existing farmhouse. <br /> <br />General discussion ensued as to whether it would be economically easible and feasible in <br />appearance to have three larger homes with one small home on the site. <br /> <br />Mr. Farrell said he did not know if there would be a market for a mall home of 850-1,000 <br />sq. ft. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wright estimated that if the applicant went with houses of approximately <br />3,800 sq. ft. that it would still be economically feasible to have jus three houses on the lots. <br /> <br />Commissioner Horan thought the applicant would not want to put 3,800 sq. ft. house in <br />this location, as it is adjacent to the fairgrounds. A person buying is size of house would <br />probably build in the Foothill Road area. <br /> <br />~ Minute. Planning Commillion <br />February 26, 1992 <br /> <br />Pa,.4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.