My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 05/08/1991
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1991
>
PC 05/08/1991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/29/2017 4:18:47 PM
Creation date
6/8/2005 12:07:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
5/8/1991
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 05/08/1991
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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 />Commissioner McGuirk called attention to Condition 7 in regard to the fence for <br />the southern property line. He said the condition does not address who will pay <br />for the fence. Mr. Swift said it is hoped it can be a "cooperative" arrangement, <br />but it could come down to just the developer paying for the fence. Staff feels a <br />"common" fence is the best way to approach the matter. <br /> <br />Commissioner Horan questioned Mr. Swift as to the appropriateness of domed sky <br />lights. Mr. Swift noted that staff has no problem with the use of domed sky <br />lights. <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. <br /> <br />Roy Thompson, 1347 Vintner Way, represented the application. He said he has <br />two issues to address: (1) Regarding Condition 11, he said this is the first time he <br />has seen this condition. He was under the impression that this was not intended <br />to be a turnaround street for the public, but felt that it should be a private <br />driveway. (2) Regarding Condition 4, he asked that the southern side yard <br />setback be allowed to remain at 7 ft. rather than staff's recommended 10 ft. He <br />felt this would be in keeping with the footage allowed for the home that was <br />burned down several years ago. <br /> <br />Mr. Thompson said he thought the key issue for approval was that he was to <br />~ obtain the neighbors' cooperation and agreement as to the appropriateness of his <br />house plans. He said they have met with all the neighbors and they have <br />expressed approval of his plans. He said they have consistently met with staff so <br />as to be doing everything correctly. He felt if he had to go with a 10 ft. setback <br />he would have to redesign the house at a considerable cost. He said staff has <br />consistently told him that R-1-6500 would be approved. He discussed the issue of <br />the tree within the 7 ft. setback and noted that the tree report came back positive. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hovingh asked if the cut and fill on the lots are equal. Mr. <br />Thompson said they are equal and no off-haul would be necessary. <br /> <br />Commissioner Michelotti further discussed the grade level with the applicant. Mr. <br />Thompson said his house would not be higher than the Mavridis home. He also <br />noted that Lots 1 and 3 will be one story, but Lot 2 which is his home is proposed <br />to be two story. In response to Commissioner Michelotti's question he said his <br />house will be 26 ft. tall measured from the highest part of the structure to the <br />lowest elevation. <br /> <br />Chairman Mahern discussed the horticulture report with the applicant, noting the <br />report recommended moving the mulberry tree. Mr. Thompson felt this was not <br />necessary as the tree has survived very well before in the existing 7 ft. setback. <br /> <br />MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION. MAY 8, 1991 Pa,. 5 <br /> <br />I. <br /> <br />. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.