My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
07
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2016
>
092016
>
07
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/30/2016 1:08:00 PM
Creation date
9/15/2016 3:24:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
9/20/2016
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
07
Document Relationships
07 ATTACHMENT 4
(Attachment)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2016\092016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
160
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
Chair Ritter: Okay, so that's one of the conditions that staff proposed. What's the feeling <br />on modifying that? Just the carport discussion. <br />Commissioner Balch: Maybe we should ask what staffs position is on it and why; if they <br />could explain or elaborate. <br />Weinstein: We're on the same page with the applicant team with regard to the fact that <br />we really don't like curb cuts off of St. John so we're there on that point. The parking <br />space beyond the garage, having to drive through a garage to get to a service parking <br />space is just a really odd configuration that poses complications typical to regular <br />tandem parking but it's even more unique in that you have to pull through an open <br />garage to get out to the street. We just don't see a lot of parking configurations like that <br />and it did seem like when we were looking at the site plan with the applicant team that <br />there would be, even pushing the garage back closer to St. John Street, that there <br />would be adequate space between the building and the garage to meet code <br />requirements and maneuver between the buildings. We get that it's a really tight fit and <br />if the Commission ends up deciding that moving the garage back is desirable, I don't <br />think we'd have massive objections to that, but it just seemed like in its current proposal, <br />it's kind of a weird configuration and more difficult to maneuver out of a parking space <br />than what we're proposing. <br />Commissioner O'Connor: How close would it be between the garage wall and the house <br />wall? <br />Otto: The staff report said two feet and I'm assuming that it's this pinch point here. <br />Commissioner O'Connor: Two feet? <br />Otto: Two feet. <br />Commissioner Brown: Is there a side door on the existing house? <br />Gardner: There is. On the east side. <br />Commissioner Brown: Okay, so the same side as the garage parking. <br />Commissioner Nagler: Where's the door from front to back on the structure? <br />Gardner: It's in the back portion of the existing structure. So it's roughly in line where the <br />garage is right now. <br />Otto: Sheet A -3.1 has a floor plan of the house. It shows a back door on that <br />side... nothing on the side there other than as you get further back there's one on the <br />side but it is set back. <br />Commissioner Balch: So there's two. There's one outside the family room and then one <br />outside the kitchen area? <br />Otto: Yes, that's the added one. <br />EXCERPT: DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 24, 2016 Page 5 of 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.