My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
16
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
081815
>
16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/18/2015 11:40:25 AM
Creation date
8/11/2015 4:04:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
8/18/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
16
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
77
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
work, the Commission calls it and just moves on. He added that he has stated his <br /> opinion, but he does not know if it is a tie or not. <br /> Commissioner Piper stated that the neighborhoods she is familiar with that may have <br /> balconies in the back seem to sit on larger-sized lots than those typically in Birdland, <br /> which are typically around % of an acre or less. She indicated that she is not saying <br /> that balconies are not appropriate for the back side a of house, but she still holds <br /> strongly to the fact and appropriateness of this particular balcony and feels that it is not <br /> the best for this specific neighborhood. <br /> Acting Chair Ritter asked Commissioner Piper if she grew up in this neighborhood and <br /> knows the neighborhood well. <br /> Commissioner Piper replied that she is quite familiar with the neighborhood and added <br /> that she knows their floor plan and has lived in a house with the same floor plan. <br /> Commissioner Balch stated that that is a very valid concern and it is definitely <br /> something to consider. He indicated that he gives credit that the balcony does not <br /> extend to the full edge of the first floor so there will be some setback. He asked the <br /> Commissioners if reducing the balcony in any size would get them there or not. <br /> Commissioner Piper replied that she did not think it would change her position because <br /> it is a100-percent balcony issue. <br /> Acting Chair Ritter stated that he is struggling because it is all up to code, but he also <br /> thinks it is the Commission's job to make decisions that are appropriate to <br /> neighborhoods. He added that this is a tough decision on the Commission and <br /> appreciates someone who has lived in the neighborhood. He indicated that in his <br /> opinion, he still feels the backyard balcony does not seem appropriate in that area. <br /> Commissioner Balch suggested that Acting Chair Ritter make a motion since he wishes <br /> to uphold the appellant, Commissioner Piper second the motion, and the Commission <br /> takes a vote; and the Commission will know if it is a tie vote, the Commission will know <br /> what to do next. <br /> Commissioner Nagler commented that if the Commission does that, which is a totally <br /> reasonable thing to do, then it eliminates the possibility that the neighbors could still <br /> work this out. <br /> Commissioner Balch stated that any of the Commissioners could continue the item right <br /> now, but until the Commission knows where it is at, it will need to vote to indicate where <br /> it is, or it could just do a straw poll. <br /> Commissioner Nagler stated that his point is that not knowing gives both sides a <br /> motivation to try and work it out. <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, May 27, 2015 Page 11 of 14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.