My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 031208
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
PC 031208
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 4:36:51 PM
Creation date
11/26/2008 11:50:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
3/12/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NAME
03/12/08
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mr. Chen expressed concern that their home's value would be decreased with a second unit next <br />to his yard. He noted that he would seek the recovery of that loss. <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br />Commissioner Fox inquired whether the FAR would be affected by the enclosure of the front <br />porch. Mr. Otto noted that it would be enclosed space, and without doing the calculations, he <br />believed off-hand that it would be part of the 20 percent. <br />In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Fox regarding the Fire Department's access to the <br />structure with a solid fence, Mr. Otto noted that Clara Lane had a roundabout that may be used <br />by the Fire Department to respond. <br />Commissioner Blank noted that the structure could be sprinklered. <br />In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Fox regarding whether the Fire Department <br />examined the plans to ensure that emergency access was adequate, Mr. Otto confirmed that was <br />part of the prof ect review. The Fire Department had no comment on this plan. <br />Commissioner Narum inquired whether there had been any thought of relocating the unit to the <br />southeast so it would be off the appellants' property line; she believed that may help the <br />appellant's privacy concerns. Mr. Otto noted that staff did not pursue that possibility with the <br />applicant because the structure was set back ten feet from the side property line where only five <br />feet was required. Staff believed that was an adequate setback for aone-story structure and <br />noted that the rear and side yard setbacks exceeded those requirements. <br />In response to an inquiry by Commissioner O'Connor regarding whether the pool was already in <br />place, Mr. Otto confirmed that it had been dug and poured. The applicant would delay pouring <br />the patio until this issue was resolved. <br />Commissioner O'Connor noted that as the house placement was moved away from the fenceline, <br />it would move closer to the house at 815 Clara Lane and negatively affect the view at 815 Clara <br />Lane. <br />Commissioner Narum believed that placement would help them as well. <br />Commissioner O'Connor believed that would require the applicants to start over. <br />Chair Blank noted that the Planning Commission had along-standing tradition of including a <br />condition of fire suppression systems and believed that should be included in the conditions of <br />approval. <br />Commissioner Olson echoed Commissioner O'Connor's comments about landscaping versus <br />solid fencing and would like the Commission to look at Condition No. 9 of Exhibit C of the staff <br />report. He believed it would apply to the property line on the northern line and inquired whether <br />that condition should apply to the other property lines involved here as well. He would like to <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 12, 2008 Page 7 of 22 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.