My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 05:258
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2005
>
SR 05:258
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/16/2005 12:13:13 PM
Creation date
9/15/2005 4:44:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
9/20/2005
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 05:258
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
90
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).
View images
View plain text
<br /> ATIACHMENT 8 <br />ROLL CALL VOTE: <br />AYES: Commissioners Arkin, Blank, Pearce, and Roberts. <br />NOES: None. <br />ABSTAIN: None. <br />RECUSED: None. <br />ABSENT: Commissioners Fox and Maas. <br />Resolution No. PC-2005-36 was entered and adopted as motioned. <br />Acting Chairperson Arkin informed the applicants and the appellants that they have <br />15 days to appeal the Commission's decision to the Council. <br />d. PUD-37. Ron Winter <br /> Application for PUD rezoning and development plan approval for the <br /> construction off our single-family residences and two rental units at 520 St. John <br /> Street. Zoning for the property is RM-15 (Multiple-Family Residential) District <br /> and Core Area Overlay District. <br />Ms. Decker indicated that the applicant, Mr. Ron Winter, is unable to attend the meeting <br />tonight but that he has submitted a letter, Attachment 3, and will have his associate, <br />Mr. Zach Heller, represent his application. Ms. Decker then presented the staff report <br />indicating that the project came before the Commission on May 11, 2005, at which time <br />the Commission requested that the project plans be peer-reviewed for concerns <br />specifically related to the architectural design; that the application come before the <br />Housing Commission for its review and comment, particularly in relation to affordability; <br />and that staff look into the possibility of saving the black walnut tree. <br />Ms. Decker advised that Larry Cannon, Cannon Design Group, peer-reviewed the project <br />and prepared a report, dated May 26, 2005, Attachment I. Mr. Cannon indicated that the <br />overall project design looked good and concentrated on details. He identified and <br />outlined ideas to enhance the fine architectural detailing of the buildings, such as the <br />sizes ofthe bellyband, the window trims, and the columns; and the addition oflattice and <br />lattice along the garage doors and the second-floor deck dividers. Ms. Decker stated that <br />she met with the applicant on July 15,2005, to discuss the details of the peer review; she <br />advised that the applicant agreed to the suggestions presented in the peer review. <br />Ms. Decker advised that the Housing Commission considered the project on June 16, <br />2005. She indicated that the Commission unanimously supported the project. It <br />supported its affordability-by-design concept and felt that the density was appropriate for <br />the site. <br />With respect to the black walnut tree, Ms. Decker indicated that staff looked at what <br />opportunities there might be to save or relocate the tree. She stated that in most <br />instances, black walnut trees are messy and a hazard because the limbs could break and <br />cause damage to the adjacent property. She added that the project's tree mitigation plan <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 27, 2005 Page 23 of31 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.