My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 070908
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
PC 070908
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 4:37:45 PM
Creation date
11/26/2008 12:02:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
7/9/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 070908
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
39
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
Ms. Decker added that staff would like to modify Condition No. 69 regarding <br />filtration as follows: "The applicant shall work with staff to provide storm water <br />treatment design solutions for review and approval by the City Engineer and the <br />Director of Planning and Community Development." She added that in this way, <br />the City conditions the optimum design solution. <br />Mr. Dolan made a correction to his response to Commissioner Fox's question <br />regarding the East Side Specific Plan bordering the project site. He stated that <br />the property to the east is owned by Legacy, which is part of the Specific Plan <br />area. <br />Commissioner Fox noted that if a motion were made for approval, she would not <br />support the project because of the following issues: <br />1. She believes projects for senior housing should be within the 1,200- to <br />2,300-square-foot range so that an average senior in the City would have <br />the ability to truly downsize and be able to afford it. She noted that she <br />felt senior housing should be aimed for those currently in Pleasanton and <br />she would like to see smaller and less expensive houses. <br />2. She would like to see the East Side Specific Plan done in conjunction with <br />this project because the Closed Session that occurred at the School Board <br />meeting to decide not to take the option for a high school was not a public <br />meeting, so people did not know that the school site option was passed <br />upon. <br />3. Regarding a gated community, she did not believe it conforms to the <br />General Plan and does not support a project that does not support the <br />General Plan. <br />4. She believes the project is too dense, specifically Lots 21, 63, and 70, <br />some of which are bordered by multiple lots in their rear and side yards. <br />5. She does not believe there is sufficient parking for the recreation area and <br />would like to see the recreation area and community center moved so that <br />it would border the City's Operations Service Center (OSC) because she <br />believes Lots 93 and 94 would get significant noise from the OSC. She <br />believes there will be extensive noise from the City's Operations Service <br />Center (OSC) and is concerned with lots bordering the OSC. <br />6. She also voiced concerns about traffic. <br />Chair Blank stated that he believed the square-foot range has to do with <br />marketing and that he did not want to dictate that. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 9, 2008 Page 25 of 39 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.