My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 102203
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
PC 102203
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/14/2017 9:42:01 AM
Creation date
12/8/2005 10:23:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/22/2003
DOCUMENT NAME
PC-102203
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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 Roberts noted that she had seen the play structure eight months ago" and <br />had objected 1:0 it becau.se there vvas nothing else surrounding iT- She believed it vvas not <br />nearly as noticeable novv that it vvas masked by the trees_ She noted that the colors vvould <br />naturally fade vvith time. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sullivan noted that his first reaction to the plans vvas that there vvere too <br />many structures on the site. He belie-vcd that 165 trees of the same kind vvas excessive" <br />but acknovvledged that vvas not vvithin the purvieV\T of the Commission_ He supported the <br />application as recommended by staff. <br /> <br />Commissioner Fox expressed concern abou.t the redV\Tood trees opening up the ground <br />visibility as they matured" and vvould like the applicant to supplement the redvvood trees <br />vvit:h lovv-Iying or medium shrubs. She preferred that the putting green not be built_ <br /> <br />In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Arkin" l'\I[r_ Iserson replied that the putting green <br />vvas not included in "the approval process_ He noted that because there vvas no grading and <br />because it vvas no"t a s"tructure,. no approval 'V\Tas required for it_ <br /> <br />Chairperson Arkin noted that he had considered buying this lot in 1996" but did not <br />because of the complexity of the lot. He complimented the applicants on their design. <br /> <br />l'v'Is. Nerland advised that Condition 14 vvas inadvertently included,. and should be <br />deleted. She noted that vvas a condition typically f"ound vvith commercial projects", vvhere <br />a landscape maintellarlCe agreement vvas required to be recorded against the property. <br /> <br />rv1:r. Iserson noted that "the vvording in Condition I that ref"erred to the landscape plan <br />should be deleted. <br /> <br />CDmmissiDner l'Vlaas moved t:D apprDve PUD-82-16-15l'Vl as condit:iDned in t:he st:aCC <br />repGrt:., and subject: t:G t:he cGndit:iGns list:ed in Exhibit: ....:0." In addit:iGn., Condit:ions 9 <br />and 14 'VVOould be delet:ed., as ",ell as t:he language in Condit:ion 1 referring -to. -the <br />landscape plan. <br />CGmmissiOlner Arkin seconded t:he mot:iOln. <br /> <br />~C>LL C~LL VC>TE <br /> <br />AYES: <br />NC>ES: <br />ABSTAIN: <br />ABSENT: <br /> <br />Commissioners ~rkin", Fox", rv1:aas,. Roberts" and Sullivan <br />None <br />None <br />Commissioner Kameny <br /> <br />Resolution No. PC-2003-46 ""as entered and adopted as motioned. <br /> <br />PLANNING CC>1VI1VIISSIC>N lVIINUTES <br /> <br />C>ctober 22, 2003 <br /> <br />Page 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.