My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 051105
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
PC 051105
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:20:53 PM
Creation date
3/9/2006 9:25:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
5/11/2005
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 051105
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
Commissioner Maas moved to continue this item and refer it to staff for further <br />moditication_ <br />Commissioner Blank seconded the motion_ <br />Commissioner Arkin expressed concern about the number of homes on a quarter-acre lot. <br />He would support a peer review of tfiis project <br />Chairperson Maas agreed that a peer review would be beneficial. <br />Commissioner Blank agreed with G'ommissioner Roberts' sensitivity toward affordable <br />or acfiievable housing, wfiich may be gained by using alternative designs. He believed <br />the roof slopes and duplex parking should be examined more closely_ He believed the <br />garages should be set for parking only and that any trees that are destroyed should be <br />replaced in addition to the payment of a mitigation fee. <br />Commissioner Roberts noted that she had spoken to Mike Fulford about the black walnut, <br />and Mr. Fulford stated that while the tree could be trimmed, the black walnuts near <br />California Reflections were dying. He believed the same fate awaited the black walnut <br />tree on this property and that it may £all on a home_ <br />Ms. Decker was hesitant to put a 30-day limit on the peer-review process because <br />Mr. Cannon had a full schedule with other City projects; the peer-review process often <br />took longer than 30 days. The City generally used only Mr. Cannon for peer review, but <br />that staff would examine the timeframe issues. <br />In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Arkin regarding whether the Housing <br />Commission should be involved in this project, Commissioner Roberts noted that this <br />project was moderate or above-moderate rather than affordable housing. <br />Chairperson Maas suggested that Commissioner Arkin bring the subject up to the <br />Housing Commission at its next rneeting_ <br />Commissioner Fox believed that more was required of developers of lower-cost housing <br />than higher-cost housing. She supported the project but would not support tfie motion for <br />further review because she was comfortable with the design as it stood. <br />ROLL CALL VOTE: <br />A YES_ Commissioners Arkin, Blank, Maas, and Roberts. <br />NOES: Commissioner Fox. <br />ABSTAi1V: None. <br />RECUSED_ None. <br />ABSENT. None. <br />The motion carried. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 11, 2005 Page 7 of 76 <br />...__. _._~_ ___-_. _'_ _..... _'T _~_._..____.-_ _.. _._ _. _. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.