Laserfiche WebLink
that out. We have a very nice plan for doing that. We have a partially paved parking lot, <br /> a partial gravel pit, and even the partially paved lot is breaking down a bit and that's <br /> going to cost about $75,000 to get that paved and up to a nice standard. The building <br /> itself, being constructed in 1979 on self-help architecture, we need some improvements <br /> in there and we've mapped that out and will cost about $280,000. And finally, it was built <br /> to code at the time. It was unincorporated land. It was up to code at the time, but we <br /> would like to bring it up to code now at a cost of about $320,000. <br /> The plan that we've been working with Mr. Houston on is going to give us the kind of <br /> revenue that we need to make the church attractive, to make it continue to be functional <br /> as a place of worship. It's going to allow us to continue our mission. We have the <br /> resources to go on as we have been, but some of these things are catching up with us <br /> and in order to really have the cash to make these larger expenditures, we need a <br /> project such as this. I don't want to take any more time, but I would like to recognize the <br /> members that we have here tonight in support of the project and just ask them to stand <br /> for a moment. Thank you. <br /> Guy Houston, Applicant: Thank you John. Now I wanted to talk about the project details <br /> in particular. In summary, we have 5 lots. We think that's a low impact on the local <br /> community there. They are one-story homes. It's a country character trying to keep with <br /> that neighborhood. They are primarily Craftsmen style homes. The scenic neighborhood <br /> improvements—there will be bike lanes and by undergrounding the power lines we think <br /> we can take a lot of the visual clutter out of there. <br /> One thing they've been doing in our work with the neighbors and talking with them <br /> about what would be a real benefit is they talked about people speeding through that <br /> area and whether they're Pleasanton residents or not doesn't really matter. But, the idea <br /> came about of the pedestrian flashing signals, and so we would like to propose to pay <br /> for two of the flashing signals with locations to be determined and I would assume one <br /> in each direction that could try to help calm those. I know that they're in the City of <br /> Pleasanton. My parents live over in the Highland Oaks area and there's one right on <br /> Foothill Road as you approach Highland Oaks and it seems to be very effective. So <br /> that's something we would like to propose because that's something the neighbors were <br /> very interested in. <br /> Ritter: Could you wrap it up and then we'll maybe have the public comment and let you <br /> come back and answer some more questions. <br /> Houston: Okay, real quick then-the visuals on the homes themselves; we did some 3-D <br /> versions of the homes so you can see what they look like. That's Lot 3, Lot 4 and then <br /> Lot 5. The outstanding issues and the discussion points I would like to bring up. I think <br /> these are really the important things. Staff identified issues and there's been some <br /> outstanding issues. The one that staff talked about before was that no development <br /> shall occur within the 20-foot setback or within 20 feet of the riparian vegetation. We <br /> frankly did not know of the riparian vegetation requirement that was in the City of <br /> Pleasanton. That was something we didn't know once we submitted, and staff <br /> responded back to us. What our solution to that is and this is something you haven't <br /> seen yet and is different from what you have is we have adjusted all of our lots and the <br /> placement of the buildings to be able to accommodate what staff wants. Actually, I think <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, January 13, 2016 Page 3 of 22 <br />