My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01 MINUTES REGULAR
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2008
>
041508
>
01 MINUTES REGULAR
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/26/2008 1:14:06 PM
Creation date
4/10/2008 3:15:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
4/15/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
01 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
home site being on the site where the existing garage is but staff believes that after more <br />information and evaluation, the site is not appropriate. <br />Mr. Iserson presented the elevations submitted by the applicant and described it as a Tuscan <br />Villa design concept, 2 stories, 28.5 feet in height and extend up to the top of the cupola. He <br />said the Specific Plan restricts homes to one story and 25 feet in height, but allows for <br />exceptions due to unusual circumstances as long as they are consistent with the Specific Plan. <br />Staff interprets this as making sure the house is well-screened and would eventually not be <br />visible from off site. Staff feels the height and massing of the homes have been minimized, a <br />substantial portion is below grade, he discussed materials, colors, fits in with the Vineyard <br />corridor design theme, said 67 trees would be removed 16 of which would be heritage, and a <br />condition of approval requires re-evaluation of the trees designated for removal in order to save <br />those that do not cause a safety risk. The applicant will plant 438 new trees which would exceed <br />the specific plan requirements of 6.1 and many would be large boxed sized trees from 24 to 60". <br />Mr. Iserson displayed the visual analysis of the site from 1-10 years from Ruby Hill, from the <br />Mitchell Katz Winery, from the fire station on Old Vineyard Avenue, Vineyard Avenue and Old <br />Vineyard Avenue, from the Greenbriar Estates development and from the Resnick and the <br />Roberts' residences. He discussed the existing well, said staff has arrived at two revised <br />conditions that addresses it and reflects the agreement that the Sarich's are intending to <br />develop a second well that they would use to irrigate the vineyards. The applicants are <br />committed to doing a job beyond green requirements and have a current point total of 161 <br />where 50 is the minimum required. <br />In summary, staff and the Planning Commission recommend the Council approve the project <br />with conditions of approval and with the modifications shown on the distributed memorandum. <br />Dan Sarich said the project is a result of a very long process that began 7 years ago, that he <br />has agreed to all conditions, they have listened to staff, the Planning Commission and <br />neighbors and have gone to considerable efforts to screen the project and have agreed not to <br />use the existing shared well with the Roberts to irrigate the future vineyard. They feel the current <br />proposed plan is the best design that meets the intent of the Vineyard Corridor Specific Plan, is <br />sensitive to site constraints, he and his family ask for support of the project. <br />Tom Pico said the Sarich family and he appreciate the efforts made to learn more about the <br />project and visited the site which has led to a different view which he hopes is positive. He said <br />the project is a model of how you can design and build a large home and fit within the <br />environment; it is screened from Vineyard, it is going to be seen primarily from the Resnick <br />property, Mary Roberts has some visual impacts but they are significantly mitigated, they agree <br />with staff's recommendations and all conditions, and he introduced John McInnes, Architect for <br />the project. <br />John McInnes, Architect, said they have refined the location over time, gave the high points of <br />their accomplishments and concessions made. They reduced the size, height and bulk of the <br />home twice; they were asked to raise the house level and side yards by 6 feet which diminished <br />the space around the home, but it did reduce grading and they saved some trees; on the north <br />side of the house they let the grade come up above the finished floor of the house and by doing <br />so, saved grading, trees, and provided screening; they eliminated the guest house; the roof of <br />the pool house was in question and they put it underground; they moved the driveway, entry <br />turn-around and pool in towards the center of the house to save additional trees which again <br />reduced the space around the house; they are designing a green house for 161 LEED points <br />City Council Minutes 4 March 18, 2008 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.