My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN112189
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1989
>
CCMIN112189
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:51:41 AM
Creation date
11/3/1999 10:36:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
9 <br /> <br /> development as proposed. Second, the current and future widening <br /> configurations of Foothill Road were taken into account. A report <br /> shows the setbacks of the houses to be between 80 ft. and 100 ft. <br /> from the road. Four parcels will be created from the front two- <br /> thirds portion of the four acre site, one of which will contain <br /> the existing house. The remaining one-third of this site will be <br /> combined with an adjacent parcel which Mr. Hempy also owns and <br /> which could be reviewed at some future time for a potential <br /> housing site. Third, there are geological concerns about an area <br /> of potential instability on the remaining one-third of the <br /> property. This is why no house has been proposed for the area. <br /> Fourth, it was pointed out that a better and safer access point to <br /> Foothill Road would be opposite Muirwood Drive North. It would <br /> also provide access to existing properties to the South and to <br /> future development on the Moller property. He then introduced Mr. <br />· Peter Shutts, Project Architect, to explain the different setbacks <br /> and how the houses could take advantage of the existing slope. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer inquired if considerations were made for other <br /> road configurations which would forestall the City's having to <br /> condemn some properties to develop this one. <br /> <br /> Mr. Shutts replied that the frontage along Mr. Hempy's <br /> property and the Moller's property on to Muirwood Drive are the <br /> only accessible portions of Foothill Road on one side. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes inquired how the elimination of three or four <br /> driveways to build the new road would be done. <br /> <br /> Mr. Shutts replied that the driveways coming from the Ku and <br /> the Kliment properties would be abandoned and would go directly to <br /> this private street. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes asked what mechanism would be utilized to ensure <br /> that the two driveways would go into the new road. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift stated that the Ku property has a condition on it <br /> that Mrs. Ku would eliminate her driveway and utilize whatever <br /> road goes through the Hempy property. The Kliment property has no <br /> legal requirements, and Mr. Kliment may continue to keep his <br /> driveway. However, he has indicated that he would be willing to <br /> give up his driveway if he had the access to the road. To do <br /> that, he would have to make arrangements to go through Mrs. Ku's <br /> and Mr. Hempy's properties. <br /> <br /> Mr. Shutts then explained in detail the site design and <br /> development of two of the four lots, including the siting of the <br /> houses relative to the parcels. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes expressed some concern regarding the density of <br /> the development being too much for the lot sizes. He inquired if <br /> there were any height restrictions on any of the homes. <br /> <br /> -9- <br /> 11-21-89 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.