My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
18 ATTACHMENTS
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2007
>
032007
>
REGULAR MEETING
>
18 ATTACHMENTS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/25/2007 1:50:29 PM
Creation date
3/16/2007 2:59:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
3/20/2007
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
18 ATTACHMENTS
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
165
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
Shoebox type parking lot lights would be installed that direct light away from neighbors. The <br />light standards would be similar to those seen in the parking lot on Del Valle Parkway side. <br />The reception from the residents of the proposed site plan has divided into two groups: the <br />residents on Del Valle Parkway and the residents on Golden Road. The Del Valle Parkway <br />residents welcome this proposal as the existing parking area accessible from Del Valley <br />Parkway would be reduced, which in turn would reduce the amount traffic passing through their <br />front doors. The Golden Road residents oppose the proposed site plan. They felt that the <br />proposal would bring additional vehicles to the Golden Road neighborhood as the parking lot on <br />the Golden Road side would be doubled (from the currently 51 parking spaces to 101 parking <br />spaces), that the construction of the education building at the proposed would make it <br />impossible to make the parking lot on Del Valle Parkway as the primary parking lot as there <br />would not no opportunity for expansion. <br />In addition, in a meeting in December 2006 with the Golden Road core group, the residents <br />expressed their objection on the proposed multiple room addition as they believe the proposed <br />addition is a form of expansion of the congregation area, which would result in additional traffic <br />to the neighborhood that the existing streets in the neighborhood do not have the capacity to <br />absorb additional vehicles. <br />Although the 1999 Master Plan was not approved in its entirety, the church pursued construction <br />according to that plan and invested significantly in the site as a result of the 1999 submittal. <br />Staff notes that there did not appear to be any concern by the Commission that the prospered <br />Mater Plan was deficient in any way. The Commission chose not to adopt the Plan and was <br />silent on any reason as to why it was not part of the action or approval. There was no contention <br />or neighbors opposing the project. <br />Architecture <br />WMB Architecture, who designed the 1999 expansion, has designed of the education building <br />and the multipurpose room expansion with the same architectural style of the existing sanctuary <br />building. <br />The education building has a contemporary style that matches the existing building (non- <br />sanctuary portion of the building). The building would have horizontal wood siding, a concrete <br />the roof, and anodized bronze aluminum windows. The building would be a brown color with <br />hunter green as the accent color. The multiple-purpose room is an extension of the existing <br />facility. Its design coherent to the design of the existing design in that it repeats the building <br />exteriors and window style. <br />Case No. PCUP-1 SS/PDR-513 Planning Commission <br />Page - 10 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.