Laserfiche WebLink
Beaudin: There's a lease issue and the applicant can better speak to the final three, but <br />think the idea is that there'd be continued use of the driving range for this period of <br />time ... do you want to add to that Larissa? <br />Seto: If the development was going to develop Phase 2 now, the netting would have to <br />be a lot higher to protect those homes because those homes are closer to the driving <br />range. <br />Commissioner Nagler: So it's an angle thing. I get it, okay. <br />Seto: There wasn't an interest right now in putting up a golf ball net that might be 80 feet <br />or higher. <br />Commissioner Nagler: Presumably though there will be a different Planning <br />Commission in place 18 years from now to decide what these three homes should look <br />like, but that's fine. <br />Seto: They would be covered by this PUD design, that's part of the phasing where they <br />wanted the guarantee for the design going forward. <br />Commissioner Nagler: Okay, just a couple of other quick questions —the allowance by <br />the Alameda County Fairgrounds to bisect their property at the sewer line —that <br />approval is secured? There's no doubt that the County fair board will agree to that? <br />Soo: The County board reviewed it and did give conceptual approval. I could have the <br />applicant further elaborate on that, but they did review it. Also the board's meeting <br />minutes are included as part of the packet. <br />Commissioner Nagler: I'm just wondering from a legal perspective how secure we are. <br />Seto: Well, the easement has not been granted yet so it isn't final, but we are relying on <br />the representations that they've made to date which are positive for it to proceed. <br />Commissioner Nagler: So let me just ask, if this is approved and then the easement is <br />not ultimately awarded for some reason, what happens then? <br />Seto: I would imagine they would need to redesign the utilities to make the sewer work <br />or put in different structures or equipment if they ended up needing a different <br />alignment. <br />Commissioner Nagler: As I understand it, there was an alternate design which was <br />problematic to at least one of the homeowners and that's how they've come to this <br />design. Is it possible that we could ask that the matter come back to the Planning <br />Commission if that easement is not awarded? <br />Weinstein: Yes, it would probably be considered, depending on the extent of the utility <br />changes from this current plan to what ended up being proposed, in the form of a <br />Planned Unit Development Modification. If it is a Major Modification we would take it <br />back to you. If there are minor changes, such as a slight change in the alignment of the <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 23, 2016 Page 5 of 46 <br />