My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 02/09/83
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1983
>
PC 02/09/83
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2017 10:26:30 AM
Creation date
4/27/2007 4:49:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/9/1983
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 02/09/83
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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 Doherty addressed the issue of Southern Pacific- <br />Western Pacific consolidating their track use and whether the <br />Southern Pacific line would remain at the Valley Avenue crossing, <br />Mr. Swift and Mr. Ruggeri indicated that Southern Pacific would <br />abandon all but a short portion of their main line, that presently <br />Southern Pacific planned to use the line at the crossing for <br />switching purposes, but that discussions were proceeding to have <br />the line eliminated at this crossing point. <br />Commissioner Jamieson asked the amount of acreage owned by various <br />businesses in the area, Mr. Ruggeri responded. <br />Chairperson Lindsey asked that when the PUD was originally approved <br />if there was any indication that E1 Charro Road could be used for <br />through truck traffic. Mr. Martin indicated that they need per- <br />mission from Kaiser to use this road, <br />Commissioner Wilson indicated that he cannot envision 20-ton trucks <br />turning left and right from Valley Avenue onto Santa Rita Road- <br />Main Street. <br />George Jensen, 1137 Kolln Street, indicated that he has concerns <br />in changing Ordinance No. 924 as approved 1/31/80 by City Council <br />with regard to condition No. 14 relating to the maximum height <br />of the building be changed from 14' to 17'. He asked staff <br />the meaning of this, i,e., whether it included air conditioning <br />equipment, etc. Mr. Harris explained. Mr. Jensen indicated <br />that if equipment was four-five feet high, it would have the <br />overall. height of the structures considerably more than that <br />approved and he is opposed to this. Mr. Martin indicated that <br />the structures would be several feet below the prior grade, thus <br />not making the structures proposed as high as one would think, <br />Mr. Jensen further stated he has no desire to have a fence erected <br />on his property line. Mr, Jensen indicated that in order to block <br />out the buildings you would have to have a fence 7' to 8' high and <br />it would make a big shadow in his rear yard. <br />Commissioner Doherty said that they have generally approved heights <br />of buildings by not including the screened areas and that the <br />property is already two feet below the prior grade which would <br />cause an overall reduction in height. <br />Judy Johnson, 3670 Chillingham, stated that their group met with <br />the developer who stated the matter would not go before the Planning <br />Commission until the Pleasanton Meadows homeowners hired an acousti- <br />cian at the developers expense to measure noise levels along Santa <br />Rita Road backing to the Meadows. She said they want an acoustician <br />in a neutral position to issue a report. She said their group has <br />the names of two different consulting companies to submit to the <br />developer for approval. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.