My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 030905
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
PC 030905
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:20:17 PM
Creation date
3/9/2006 9:07:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
3/9/2005
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 030905
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
Ton Freitas, Happy Valley resident, spoke in opposition of the proposal and felt that the <br />design review process outlined for these homes with the previous PUD approval should <br />be n~aintaincd so that the Happy Valley residents would have ample time to review the <br />applications and make their concerns known to staff~ <br />THE PUBLIC] HEARING WAS CLOSED~ <br />Commissioner Roberts noted that the design guidelines were well done and that the <br />examples of styles afforded better direction for the property owners and their <br />arc hite ct s/builders . <br />Commissioner Fox liked the design guidelines but indicated that the review process <br />should stay the same such that each custom home should be subject to a Planning <br />Commission hearing. <br />The C'ommission's discussion focused on the public receiving adequate notice of a <br />proposed home design, thereby giving the public adequate time to register their <br />comments and concerns with staff, on the homes on these sites achieving a high level of <br />design quality; and on the homes achieving asemi-custom appearance as stated in the <br />original design guidelines. The Planning Commission added the following conditions of <br />approval : <br />---~-- 1 . The sides of the structures facing the golf course fairways should be designed to <br />address safety issues that might arise from the proximity of the golf course, <br />e.g., using tempered glass in the windows that may be hit by golf ball s. <br />2. Roof-mounted photovoltaic systems should be physically and visually integrated <br />with the structure's roof nzatcri als and design, e. g., s~~rface-mounted, low-proFle, <br />etc. <br />3. "free planting for the golf course homes should be increased to one tree per <br />750 square feet of lot area- <br />4. Safety nets to protect the houses from the proximity of the golf course would not <br />be allowed. <br />5. Noticing for the future design applications should include the entire Happy Valley <br />Specific Plan area. <br />6. Landscape and building up-lighting and similar lighting, excluding low-level <br />lighting for pathways, should be prohibited- <br />]. Wcstbridge Lane should be designated as a temporary access road to the golf <br />course lots. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 9, 2005 Page 5 of 1 O <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.