My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 02/13/1991
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1991
>
PC 02/13/1991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/29/2017 4:17:56 PM
Creation date
6/2/2005 11:46:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/13/1991
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 02/13/1991
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 />-- <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Chairman Mahern commented this is the first time she heard of a <br />pond on the property. <br /> <br />commissioner McGuirk <br />from Foothill Road. <br />has not been decided <br /> <br />asked how the property would <br />Mr. Swift responded that the <br />by the City at this time. <br /> <br />be accessed <br />ultimate design <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br /> <br />commissioner Wright stated he would be in favor of using stucco <br />as a material and felt it looks better than wood and is more fire <br />retardant. <br /> <br />Commissioner McGuirk said he would not wish any building to be <br />closer than 150 ft. to the property line; that stucco is <br />appropriate if kept out of sight of Foothill Road; he favored the <br />use of wood materials on Foothill Road. He urged that all <br />geologic and ground water issues be thoroughly determined before <br />any approval is given. Generally, he said he supports the <br />project. <br /> <br />Chairman Mahern stated she has seen the project before at the DRB <br />stage. She liked the project and felt it provides some <br />flexibility as to the kind of homes provided. She felt it was <br />appropriate to put townhomes there, if attractively done. She <br />felt the applicant has gone out of the way to stay within the <br />available guidelines; the amount of open space is commendable. <br />She suggested they might look at some areas of open space to see <br />if a conservation easement might be put in. She wanted all <br />geologic and water issues to be properly addressed. In regard to <br />the applicant's request for modified conditions, she would not <br />favor a change and felt this was addressed at the DRB stage. <br /> <br />Commissioner Michelotti stated she agreed with Chairman Mahern's <br />comments. She added she liked the concept of cluster homes. She <br />was pretty comfortable with the design of the project. She felt <br />the request for gazebos would have to be further researched. <br />The landscape plan could be worked out with staff. She was <br />flexible as to the use of stucco, but combined with other <br />materials; she felt the 4,500 sq. ft. cap may not be appropriate <br />and would rather address design in relation to setbacks and <br />distances between houses. She liked the fact that many of the <br />units would not be seen from Foothill Road and felt that she <br />would be looking for adequately wide streets and setbacks to give <br />an open feel to the townhouse part of the proposed project. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hovingh said he would like to see the next plan to <br />show the contours and the preliminary grading. He wanted the <br />applicant and City to consider a full fledged street between lots <br />13, 14 and the townhomes project, with an emergency exit to a <br />major street. He would favor C Court be tied into Presley Road <br />that goes into Stoneridge Road. He would also want a flow chart <br /> <br />MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 13, 1991 PAGE 12 <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.