My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 040705
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
PC 040705
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:20:33 PM
Creation date
3/9/2006 9:11:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/7/2005
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 040705
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
Mary Roberts, PO Box ]. 54, noted that she was not related to Allen Roberts and had no <br />obj action to this project. She noted that the caretaker's unit was being relocated and that <br />the Berlogars' house was constructed. before the design guidelines for the Specific Plan_ <br />She noted that there were no deed restri coons that the second unit must remain as such; <br />she did not want future owners to split the propcrty. She would like to sea low-level <br />lighting without up-lighting, such as was discussed for the Happy Valley area. She noted <br />that people had a tendency to install huge lights in front of the barn door, creating light <br />leakage. She did not believe that fill could be exported until there was a final neap for the <br />other propcrty_ <br />Ms_ Nerland believed that the till would remain on that parcel- <br />Mr_ Shutts noted that the lighting could be controlled, using only general illumination <br />required by Code; he did not object to a condition detailing that requirement. Regarding <br />the grading, he noted that the only area of fill would be in the area of the wine barn, <br />which required some excavation of the hillside. He noted that would create a balance in <br />the ti l7_ <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br />In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Maas regarding second units, Ms_ Decker stated <br />that the caretaker's unit was not considered as a second residential unit for the site <br />because it relocates the existing caretaker's unit from the existing location and was <br />previously approved at the time the Vineyard C=orridor Specific Plan was adopted. It is <br />not in conformity with the second residential unit requirements with respect to size_ <br />Deed restrictions would not be required because the structure was specific to the <br />caretaking of the site and. its accessory structures_ <br />Commissioner Arkin moved to approve Case PDR-336 as recommended by staff, <br />with the added conditions that only low-level exterior lighting be used and that the <br />underground wine cellar meet all health and safety requirements_ <br />Commissioner Maas seconded the motiou_ <br />Commissioner Blank proposed an amendment requiring the addition of a fourth <br />tree on the hay barn, a sixth tree on the shop and wine barn, and the addition of <br />some natural lau dsca piu~ around the future horse bar~~ <br />Commissioners Arkin and Maas agreed to amend the motion as proposed. <br />KOLL CALL VOTE: <br />AYES: Commissioners Arkin, Blank, and Maas. <br />NOES: Nonc_ <br />ABSTAIN: None_ <br />RECUSED: Commissioner Roberts_ <br />ABSENT: Commissioner Fox_ <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 7, 2005 Page 10 of 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.