My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 08/10/71
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1970-1979
>
1971
>
PC 08/10/71
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/30/2017 11:40:56 AM
Creation date
4/30/2007 4:41:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
8/10/1971
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 08/10/71
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
4~~~s"N~~y f AS TO N <br />CITY o PLE AN <br />.~, <br />~~~° Planning Commission <br />`~ M {O ~ <br />MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING. <br />~at8 Augus t 10 , 19 71 <br />Time : 8 : 00 PM <br />Place; Pleasanton Justice Court <br />573 Mission Park Unit 4~5, Pleasanton <br />~b sent <br />abstain: <br />MATTERS FOR <br />COMMISSION'S <br />REVIEW <br />P.U.D.-69-5 <br />Res. No. 1110, <br />approved (roofing) <br />Res. No. 1111 <br />Approved (siding) <br />here were no questions and no add- <br />tions from the staff. The Public <br />Baring was closed. A resolution <br />as entered to approve with the staff <br />ecommendations, and was passed un- <br />nimously. <br />here was a five minute break, at <br />his time Commissioner Hirst arrived. <br />toneson Development Company - re- <br />uest for a change in exterior fin- <br />sh for the Stoneridge Townhouse <br />.U .D. Mr. Castro showed theCom- <br />ission some exhibits that the appli- <br />ant submitted regarding color pro- <br />osals for exteriors. Chairman <br />arrigan asked if there were any <br />uestions, and Commissioner Hirst <br />aid that there has been a final plan <br />pproved, and he thought it should be <br />osted for all to see. Chairman <br />arrigan read the staff report of <br />m y 22. Mr. Art Schumaker was pres- <br />nt, representing Stoneson Develop- <br />ent Company. Mr. Schumaker discuss- <br />d the merits of wood siding versus <br />tucco. He felt that stucco will <br />tand up better over the years. <br />iding does present a problem in <br />vailability. There was considerable <br />iscussion about other Stoneson pro- <br />ects using wood siding that have not <br />eld up well. Mr. Schumaker then <br />iscussed the roofing and said the <br />omposition roof was primarily for <br />olor. He also stated that they <br />ould use a medium grade of composi- <br />ion roof material. Mr. Castro re- <br />arked that he found it difficult to <br />ay that shake is better than composi <br />ion. Mr. Schumaker then stated <br />Zesolution: <br />Seconded: <br />dyes <br />floes <br />absent: <br />abstain: <br />esolution: <br />econded: <br />yes: <br />oes: <br />bsent: <br />bstain: <br />-5 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.