My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 11/13/1991
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1991
>
PC 11/13/1991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/29/2017 4:22:22 PM
Creation date
6/8/2005 12:35:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
11/13/1991
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 11/13/1991
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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 />Commissioner McGuirk questioned Mr. Iserson as to the average comparative lot size of the <br />homes in the general area of the proposed project. Mr. Iserson thought they would be about <br />12,000 sq. ft. lot sizes in that neighborhood. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hovingh discussed issues relating to the Martinque Tract PUD with Mr. <br />Iserson. Mr. Iserson noted that the PUD for Martinque did not expire, but the tentative map <br />will lapse at some point in time. <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. <br /> <br />Mike Farrell, 1984 Railroad Avenue, Livermore, represented the application. He noted that <br />the applicant, Anita Davidson, has been and is out of town for a training session; hence, the <br />number of continuances. He thanked staff for an excellent report. He gave a brief <br />background of the project site, noting that the existing farmhouse is over 100 years old, and <br />that Pleasanton seems to appreciate and want to preserve historical structures. He explained <br />that is the main reason for trying to preserve the old farmhouse; they also thought it could <br />set the style for the rest of the project development. He observed that the staff report makes <br />issue of the services in the area as they will not be installed within the Martinque <br />development; he said the applicant is willing to pay for the cost of installing the utilities as <br />recommended by staff and did not think that would be a problem. Mr. Farrell pointed out <br />that the lot lines could be adjusted so that each is 10,000 sq. ft., if this is necessary. He <br />would still prefer to have a 4-10t project, rather than 3. <br /> <br />Commissioner Michelotti questioned Mr. Iserson as to the necessity for the farmhouse <br />renovation; she commented that she did not remember this as being a required part of the <br />plan. Mr. Iserson responded that retention of the farmhouse is not included in the conditions <br />of approval. Mr. Farrell noted that the applicant felt it would be appropriate to incorporate <br />it into the project and use it as a "theme". It is mentioned in the applicant's design <br />guidelines. <br /> <br />Commissioner Horan asked Mr. Farrell if the intent is to restore the old farmhouse to its <br />original appearance or to simply renovate or remodel it. Mr. Farrell indicated it would be <br />more of a renovation. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued between Commissioners Horan and Hovingh and Mr. Higdon in regard to <br />sewer line connections. Commissioner Hovingh expressed concern that the applicant would, <br />in effect, be paying twice for the utility connections. Mr. Farrell observed that they need to <br />examine this issue more carefully. <br /> <br />Chairman Mahem questioned staff as to whether the lines on Rose Lane would be linked to <br />those on Rose Avenue. Mr. Higdon replied they would eventually be hooked together. <br /> <br />Minutes Plsnning Commission November 13. 1991 <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />,. <br /> <br />. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.