My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 06:210
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2006
>
SR 06:210
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/6/2007 11:06:55 AM
Creation date
9/1/2006 2:03:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
9/5/2006
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 06:210
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
66
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 /> <br /> <br />The Stantons state that the "drawings are not complete with the measurements and etc." The <br />appellants make a valid point with this issue. Staff encourages plans that are submitted with all <br />measurements called out and we require that the plans are accurate and to scale so that staff can <br />check all measurements and calculations presented by the applicant. At the time plans are <br />submitted to the Building Department, full measurements and structural calculations are <br />required. However, to address the appellants' concern, a condition of project approval requires <br />any plan sets suhmitted to the Building Department to have the street name spelled correctly, <br />provide exterior dimensions, and show all finished elevation heights for all levels. <br /> <br />At the time staff responded to the appellants' discussion points in the memo dated July 25, 2006 <br />(Exhibit E), staff did not fully comprehend the appellants' concern regarding the discrepancy <br />between the square footage of living area stated on the Iirst plan sheet (A I) compared to that <br />stated at the bottom of pages A2, A3, and A4. Stall contacted the applicant, Bob Sweeney, to <br />ask about this discrepancy. Mr. Sweeney explained that his sofhvare program is unable to <br />differentiate garage space and open space and that his calculation on the Iirst plan sheet (A I) is <br />correct. Staff explained the discrepancy issue at the Planning Commission hearing and Mr. <br />Sweeney was there to answer the Commissioners' questions. <br /> <br />Finally, the Stantons reiterate that the backyard planter area is too narrow to plant two trees and <br />have issue with the fact that the Planning Department is not specifying the type of trees to be <br />planted. As noted above, staff has conditioned the planting of trees within the rear yard planter <br />strip to be subject to the review and approval of the City's Landscape Architect to ensure the <br />appropriateness and viability of the species to be planted, The Landscape Architect has <br />recommended Pittosporlltn eugenioides and this is rellected as a condition of approval. <br /> <br />SR:06:210 <br /> <br />Page 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.