My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 09/26/84
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1984
>
PC 09/26/84
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2017 10:29:15 AM
Creation date
4/26/2007 4:53:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
9/26/1984
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 09/26/84
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
Howard Sword, 2171 Goldcrest Circle, indicated he is representing <br />CPS Pleasanton One which is a limited partnership and not <br />Prudential nor Callahan Pentz Properties. Mr. Sword reviewed the <br />plan and its uniqueness. <br />Cathy Deino, POD, landscape architect for this project reviewed <br />the entire landscape plan describing the species of the plants in <br />their plan. <br />Mr. Sword indicated that they concur with the staff report and <br />the conditions recommended thereon. <br />Commissioner Innes asked if it is planned to have one tenant for <br />each of the buildings and asked what would happen to the <br />maintenance of the common landscaping if later the properties <br />were sold separately. Mark Sweeney, 4858 Cobbler Court <br />in the buildings stated they have no intentions of sellingatheer <br />property. If an offer was made the , ' <br />would have a cross easement or someyother method ofrcommonthey <br />maintenance would be done. <br />Steve, Fee Munson, stated that legally the properties cannot be <br />split. The minimum lot size is two acres, setbacks are a minimum <br />of 25 ft. and there is only 40 ft. between the buildings. <br />Peder Jacobson, 6122 Allbrook Circle, spoke in opposition to this <br />project because of noise. He stated that nothing has been done <br />to reduce the sound level in his rear ard. <br />asked where Mr. Jacobson's home was with relationship tohHacienda <br />Business Park. Mr. Jacobson indicated it is at the corner of <br />Hopyard Road and Stoneridge Drive. <br />The public hearing was closed. <br />Commissioner Lindsey complimented the applicant on the quality of <br />the proposed project. He didn't have a solution to Mr. <br />Jacobson's problems but asked him to please communicate with the <br />City staff. Concerning traffic Commissioner Lindsey said he <br />would like to go on record that he would have a difficult time <br />proceeding on any future Hacienda applications without the <br />traffic standards as requested previousl <br />them by the next meeting. Commissioner Lindse would like to have <br />application. Y pported this <br />Commissioner Innes indicated he would be ha <br />application or second a motion if he could beyassuredptherehwould <br />be a survey done for future applications. <br />Commissioners would make this motion. No one dided if any of the <br />Mr. Harris stated that when Stoneridge is completed, the <br />Hopyard/Stoneridge intersection will be reanalyzed and something <br />will be done to reduce the noise level in Mr. Jacobson's yard. <br />Chairman Doherty suggested that Mr. Jacobson make an appointment <br />to meet with staff. <br />- 7 - <br />r_. <br />_.. _... <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.