My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN042198
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1998
>
CCMIN042198
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:27 AM
Creation date
2/3/1999 4:10:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/21/1998
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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
Pleasanton. She felt there did not need to be any more larger houses built on the hill. She <br />hoped that the Council would not approve this project. She also believed there needed to be a <br />limitation put on the number of garages and square footage. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico asked staff if the house would be visible from Foothill Road. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said a person in a vehicle traveling northbound would see the house as the cars <br />approach the intersection at Muirwood Drive. However, the house would probably be blocked <br />by a ridge from those traveling southbound on Foothill Road. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti said the greatest impact will be for those traveling northbound on Foothill <br />until the road drops down past Muirwood Drive. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala said these lots were looked at in February 1997 and it was 4-0 vote not to <br />increase the square footage over 4500 sq. ft. In October 1997 plans were brought forth and the <br />developer was advised that it was over the 4500 sq. ft. limit. She said the buyers bought this <br />lot knowing the restrictions and she would not approve anything beyond the 4500 sq. ft. She <br />believed consistency was important so that the staff and the developers would know that the limit <br />really is 4500 sq.ft. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver said generally he did not like PUD's having modifications. When Moller <br />Ranch was approved, he believed that the houses would not be visible, but they are. The <br />damage is already done. The guidelines state 4500 sq.ft. but nothing about the size of the <br />garages. The addition of the garage increases the massiveness of the house. He suggested <br />pulling the garage in to create a better design and stop the visual damage. He supported the <br />additional square footage instead of saying no and potentially ending up with a worse design if <br />the buyers were to get approval for a second unit, a granny flat, etc. He understood where Ms. <br />Ayala was coming from and wanted future buyers to understand there is a 4500 sq. ft. limitation. <br />But he felt the big issue was not being addressed. The issue is how the house and garage are <br />laid out. His inclination is to support the concept of the addition, all square footage, reduce the <br />driveway to twelve feet, reduce the massiveness of the front of the building, and only change <br />the color if the Planning Director approved it. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti agreed with Mayor Tarver regarding the approval of Moller Ranch, the <br />visual impacts, and how it was believed the development would not be seen. But that is not <br />what is being addressed tonight. Tonight is an individual seeking approval. She said the square <br />footage is being added to the front of the house and felt it would not be obtrusive to the overall <br />design of the house. She was willing to support the modification on this particular lot. She <br />agreed with Mr. Glenn's comments regarding the driveway and felt it should be left at sixteen <br />feet. She said the house will be tucked into the hillside and therefore not be visible from <br />Foothill Road. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico had concerns with the Moller Ranch development. He felt if Council deviated <br />from the standards, massive homes will be built on Foothill Road. He could not support going <br />beyond the 4500 square feet and therefore would not support the appeal. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 8 4/21/98 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.