My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 10/23/1991
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1991
>
PC 10/23/1991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/29/2017 4:20:36 PM
Creation date
6/8/2005 12:33:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/23/1991
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 10/23/1991
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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 Michelotti commented that in regard to the agreed upon 30 ft. height of the <br />house, she said she would not want to see a series of long supports for decking. She felt the <br />Commission needs to set a standard of a 30 ft. height for this house. Chairman Mahem <br />agreed with those comments. <br /> <br />Chairman Mahem questioned staff as to their feeling about providing the two accesses to the <br />Starnes property. She noted she would not be in favor of providing two. Mr. Iserson stated <br />that the Starnes are not really requesting two accesses and further clarified the situation. He <br />indicated that Mrs. Ku would only be responsible for providing access easements to the <br />Starnes property. The staff believes the front easement is necessary since the Starnes' <br />existing driveway would become too steep wit the widening of Foothill Road to its ultimate <br />configuration. The Starnes have requested the rear access easement for maintenance <br />purposes. This was agreed among all parties at the Design Review stage. <br /> <br />Commissioner Horan felt that the decks and porches should be included in the overall height <br />of the house, if it is to be utilized as leisure or recreational. If it is to be considered as a <br />part of terracing, landings, or access in getting to the front doorway, and does not exceed six <br />ft. in height of the ground itself, he would not include it. For example, a set of 3-4 stairs <br />would be acceptable, or 3-4 stairs that would lead to another flat area would be appropriate. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Chairman Mahem said she still has a problem with the project. She felt it is not in <br />accordance with the Foothill Guidelines. She thought Lots 1 and 2 should have only one <br />house on it; she would limit house height to 24 ft. She felt too many exceptions were made <br />on the project. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hovingh agreed with Chairman Mahem's comments. He added, however, <br />that he could support it if the height were 24 ft., which would make it conform more to the <br />Foothill Road Overlay District guidelines. He felt the lower height was necessary to <br />maintain the "solid angle" with the decreased Foothill Road setback (from 150' to 120'). <br /> <br />Further discussion ensued as to the Foothill Road guidelines. <br /> <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Hovingh, seconded by Commissioner Michelotti <br />recommending approval of the Negative Declaration prepared for Case PUD-91-2 inasmuch <br />as project approval would not create a significant adverse effect on the environment. <br /> <br />ROLL CALL VOTE: <br /> <br />AYES: <br />NOES: <br />ABSENT: <br />ABSTAIN: <br /> <br />Commissioners Horan, Hovingh, McGuirk, Michelotti, and Chairman Mahem <br />None <br />None <br />None <br /> <br />Minutes Plsnning Commission Meeting October 23, 1991 <br />Page 11 <br /> <br />I. <br /> <br />. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.