My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN090385
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1985
>
CCMIN090385
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:50:22 AM
Creation date
11/9/1999 12:08:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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
At this point the architect, Barry Burkus, 223 E. De La Guirra, <br /> Santa Barbara, showed illustrations of the project and pointed out the land <br />~lan, elevations, parking, and landscaping. He stated that after <br /> iscussions with the neighbors, they have agreed to soften the color of the <br />~e stated that there will be soft wood tones around the windows. <br /> oof to a burnt terra cotta or brown tone with light adobe colored stucco. <br /> <br />'~r. Burkus stated the units are large, that is the reason they call the <br />~nits 2 master bedrooms. He stated that the height of the units along the <br /> <br /> i d n from eye-line by vegetation. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lee Chugg, 7677 Chestnut Way, stated that staff prepared an <br /> excellent report that addressed all items questioned on the appeal. He <br /> stated that one of the key issues was the definition of high density, which <br /> the staff report explained very clearly. He stated that better <br /> communication was needed between the City and homeowners because they were <br /> ~ble to discuss this project with Stoneson until August 12th. Mr. Chugg <br /> ~tated that the neighbors were told that townhouses were to be built in <br /> Lhat property and that they were very upset when they learned that <br /> dpartments were to be built there instead. He asked if there were some <br /> type of preliminary consensus that could be agreed upon before time and <br /> expense is put into the project. He stated that they were told originally <br /> that there would be 158 townhouses versus the 216 apartments that are <br /> currently planned. Mr. Chugg presented a petition to Council stating their <br /> opposition to this project in its present form with 475 signatures. At <br /> this point he asked the people in the room that signed the petition to <br /> stand, a majority of the room stood without count. Mr. Chugg then read the <br /> petition as follows: <br /> <br /> "We undersigned, residents of Stoneridge area, signed this petition to <br /> show the opposition to the approval of Z85-155 in its present form. <br /> We oppose the project in several respects and ask that the City <br /> Council amend the conditions for approval in the following ways: <br /> <br /> Th~ proposed number of apartment units, 216, is too high in <br /> density. We request a reduction in number of units to 180. We <br /> feel this would result in an acceptable reduction in off-site <br /> parking problems, general traffic flow, congestion and noise. We <br /> also would like to request that the developer be required to <br /> amend the overall design of the project so that it blends in with <br /> the adjacent neighbor homes and townhouses and that the developer <br /> be required to submit and seek approval of of the Stoneridge <br /> Homeowners Association with respect to these design revisions. <br /> <br /> Mr. Chugg stated that he is submitting this petition for consideration <br /> and hopes that Council will note that a big majority of the people'that <br /> live in that area have signed this in opposition to the high number of <br /> units. <br /> <br /> 9-3-85 8 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.