My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN082013
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2013
>
CCMIN082013
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/18/2013 3:26:44 PM
Creation date
9/18/2013 3:26:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
8/20/2013
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
unless proven otherwise and therefore not subject to historical limitations. The former would be <br /> presumed to of some significance and therefore subject to some level of protection, unless proven to be <br /> unworthy through qualified studies. He said it is his opinion that the applicant's study meets the intent of <br /> these standards and ultimately demonstrates that the community might be better served by allowing the <br /> applicant to replace a dilapidated and insignificant structure with 2 new homes. <br /> Scott Raty, Chamber of Commerce, said there is clear consensus that the existing mobile home park is <br /> an eyesore and the existing home is in need of substantial improvements. He stated that the Chamber <br /> has a long history in helping to identify the downtown as a vibrant business district and to discourage <br /> government interference from needlessly standing in the way of this revitalization. He said Ponderosa <br /> has long since set the bar for quality residential development in Pleasanton and cautioned that <br /> subjecting them to this drawn out process over a relatively small project would cause many to question <br /> the value of doing business here. He encouraged the Council to find that the existing home has no <br /> historic value and approve the 14 unit project. He asked whether other developments in the downtown <br /> has been subjected to requirements comparable to those being asked of Ponderosa, which include the <br /> $2,500 Bernal Park fee, dedicated easement, pedestrian connection to Vervais Avenue and park fees. <br /> Arne Olson, Planning Commission, noted he was absent from the Commission's July meeting. He <br /> stated for the record that he agreed with fellow Commission members that this is a wonderful project <br /> and that he was delighted to see the applicant present a design that responded to some of the <br /> concerns identified at the earlier workshop. However, he said he did not agree with the Commission's <br /> action and would have voted in favor of the project, with direction to staff to bifurcate the issue of the <br /> existing home. He said Ponderosa's core competency is new construction rather than rehabilitation, <br /> noted that recent information suggests a solution for the home is at hand, and asked the Council to <br /> approve the project. <br /> Emilie Cruzan strongly urged the Council to exhaust every measure in preserving the existing home, <br /> which she described as historic to the neighborhood and very similar in structural appearance to two <br /> lovely homes right on First Street. She felt that 14 homes would be a bit much for the proposed project <br /> site, which is situated along an already difficult and soon to become more difficult stretch of Stanley <br /> Boulevard. She felt that some sort of mixed use for the home would be an ideal compliment to <br /> surrounding uses and encouraged the Council to approve Option 1. <br /> Linda Garbarino said it is a rare opportunity for any elected body to be presented with a win-win, which <br /> is what the Council has in Option 1 and a buyer waiting to rehabilitate a historic home at the gateway to <br /> such a lovely project. She asked the Council to support Option 1. <br /> Peter MacDonald said he supported the preference of Ponderosa Homes. He expressed confusion <br /> over staff's determination to charge the applicant $30,000 for rehabilitation of the existing home but <br /> suggested that if Option 1 were approved, these funds should be dedicated to the home and not Bernal <br /> Park, regardless of whether the property is sold. <br /> Ms. Hardy thanked the public for their comments. <br /> Vice-Mayor Cook-Kallio requested clarification on the current agreement between Ponderosa Homes <br /> and Lutheran Church, the property owner. <br /> Ms. Hardy, Mr. Schrader, and Mr. Morris provided contradictory information, with the applicant believing <br /> they retained the option to purchase the existing home with the rest of the site depending on the <br /> Council's action and Mr. Morris believing this option had been relinquished the month before. Mr. Morris <br /> clarified that Ponderosa has retained its option on the remainder of the site and that the purchase price <br /> was reduced accordingly. <br /> City Council Minutes Page 8 of 10 August 20,2013 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.