My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
06 ATTACHMENT 7
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2008
>
030408
>
06 ATTACHMENT 7
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/29/2008 3:59:11 PM
Creation date
2/29/2008 9:55:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
3/4/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
06 ATTACHMENT 07
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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
1. Whether the modified development plan is in the best interests of the <br />public health, safety, and general welfare: <br />The public health and safety require that the wall not restrict access to garbage <br />pick-up or obstruct emergency access to/from Hap's. The presence of the wall <br />has the potential to negatively impact both these issues. Therefore, conditions of <br />approval are necessary to modify the gate leading to the Pleasanton <br />Station/Railroad Square parking lot to serve as a legal emergency access and to <br />record easements allowing emergency access from the Hap's site to the <br />Pleasanton Station and Railroad Square sites and allowing use of the Pleasanton <br />Station/Railroad Square parking lot for Hap's garbage pick-up. With these <br />conditions, the wall will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and <br />general welfare. <br />2. Whether the modified development plan is consistent with the Pleasanton <br />General Plan: <br />The General Plan does not expressly address walls of this type. The Community <br />Character Element addresses aesthetics, and from that perspective, the wall is <br />attractively designed and will screen the back of Hap's Restaurant, its trash <br />dumpster, and grease containers from public view. As conditioned, the gate will <br />allow for emergency access between properties and for garbage collection. <br />Therefore, the wall as conditioned would be consistent with the General Plan. <br />3. Whether the modified development plan is compatible with previously <br />developed properties located in the vicinity of the plan: <br />The modification consists of adding a masonry wall six feet in height along a 30 <br />ft. portion of a property line separating a parking lot from the rear/side of a <br />restaurant. The wall is a continuation of an existing chain link fence along that <br />property line. The wall is constructed of split-face masonry block, is tan in color, <br />and is compatible with the materials and finishes of the surrounding area. <br />Therefore, this finding can be made. <br />4. Whether the modified development plan is compatible with the natural, <br />topographic features of the site: <br />The wall is located in a developed area in Downtown and does not conflict with <br />any natural topographic features. <br />5. Whether grading in conjunction with the modified development plan takes <br />into account environmental characteristics and is designed in keeping with <br />the best engineering practices to avoid erosion, slides, or flooding, and to <br />have as minimal an effect upon the environment as possible. <br />No grading was required to construct the wall. <br />PUD-81-28-05M January 9, 2008 Page 9 of 11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.