My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 102506
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
PC 102506
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:27:20 PM
Creation date
7/12/2007 10:06:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/25/2006
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 102506
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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
In response to an inquiry by Acting Chairperson Fox regading the landscape plan, <br />Ms. Decker replied that a condition could be added to require the plan to come back to <br />the Planning Commission or to have the applicant provide it and have a conversation with <br />the neighborhood in between the period of time this action was taken and it is brought to <br />the City Council. <br />Commissioner Blank preferred that the applicant meet with the neighbors and added that <br />there was little information about the landscaping plan for review. Ms. Decker noted that <br />a condition would be added. <br />Acting Chairperson Fox requested that a 360-degree landscaping plan be presented, <br />including simulations from the most proximate residents. <br />Commissioner Blank moved to: (1) find that the project will not have a significant <br />effect on the environment and that the project has a de minimus impact of the site's <br />wildlife; (2) find that the proposed major modification to the PUD development plan <br />is consistent with the General Plan and the purposes of the PUD ordinance <br />recommend; (3) make the PUD findings as stated in the staff report; (4) make the <br />findings for the conditional use permit as stated in the staff report; and <br />(5) recommend approval to the City Council of the Negative Declaration and Case <br />PUD-93-02-8M and to approve Case PCUP-181, subject to the conditions of <br />approval as shown on Exhibit B of the staff report as recommended by staff, with <br />the following modifications: <br />1. Add the following sentence at the end of Condition No. 1: "The applicant <br />shall submit color samples for the review and approval of the Planning <br />Director. " <br />2. Add the following language at the end of Condition No. 5: <br />"Fixtures shall be no greater than 14 feet in height, including any pedestal <br />assembly, and shall be `shoebox' shielded standards or equal. The design of <br />all lighting shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. The <br />lighting shall utilize photocells and timers to shut off lighting when the <br />facility is not in use. The parking, building, and genera[ site security <br />lighting shall be the minimum allowed by the Police Department. The <br />applicant shall submit a photometric plan which shall include the following: <br />• Photometric calculations detailing all exterior security lighting, <br />• Footcandle calculations, <br />• Fixture schedule, and <br />• Cut sheets for light fixtures identifying the specific luminaire and <br />lamp manufacturer." <br />3. Combine Conditions No. 15 and 24 regarding noise emanating from <br />equipment to read as follows: <br />"No equipment shall be located on the south of the wine production area. <br />Equipment and machinery used for wine production shall meet the <br />following noise restriction as required by the Noise Ordinance: <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 25, 2006 Page 8 of 21 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.