PC 111302 - Laserfiche WebLink

_ parcel. He indicated that only thing to be removed in the future is the gravel driveway that the Nolans are currently using to bring in tractors or heavy equipment. Commissioner Arkin presented a hypothetical scenario ten years from now wherein two different families who are not in the best terms own the two homes and do not want to share the driveway. He asked how this issue might be resolved. Chairperson Maas commented that her family currently share a driveway with another family, and their deeds provide easement access to each of their homes; they both pay taxes on the driveway and share its maintenance. Ms. Lynn Tracy Nerland stated that it would be a requirement of the subdivision that the deeds include easement rights for both properties. Mr. Iserson indicated that a minor subdivision is needed to actually create the lots. He explained that at that point, there would be a condition to record a legal document that would provide an easement over the driveway, that the driveway would serve both lots and access cannot be restricted by either party, and that there would be shared maintenance, upkeep, and use. He indicated that a number of such cases currently exist in the City and that the legal mechanism has prevented the occurrence of any problems. .- Commissioner Arkin asked if there would be any other way in the future to provide direct access to the second parcel. Mr. Iserson replied that the parties can always come back to request that the PUD be amended to allow another driveway on the site, at which time staff would have to look at its impact on the trees. He added that if the City approved the modification, a new legal document would have to be recorded to delete the easement provision. Commissioner Kameny inquired if, in the schematic lotting plan, the four future lots on the first parcel could theoretically be designed such that a driveway easement over the first parcel could be created to serve the second parcel and the future lots be plotted at a later date. Mr. Iserson replied that this is not a final lotting pattern; it simply presents a good pattern for sharing the driveway. Commissioner Arkin inquired if the creation of the new lot would require the payment of new fees. Mr. Iserson said yes, although there may be some credits for the existing house. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. ,-.. Ms. Beatrice Nolan, 1027 Rose Avenue, stated that she was proud of the new houses that were built, which are a compliment to Pleasanton. She stated that a friend of theirs would like to purchase the cottage, and she was confident they would make the house more historically attractive than it already is. She requested the Commission to approve their proposal. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 13, 2002 Page 8