My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 052715
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
PC 052715
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 4:47:53 PM
Creation date
8/10/2017 4:37:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
5/27/2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
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 />Commissioner Piper stated that if the Commission wants to go to the direction of having <br />the neighbors work it out, it should ask the applicant and the appellant if that is <br />agreeable to them because based on everything she has read, she did not think there is <br />any room for that. <br />Acting Chair Ritter agreed that he gets that idea too. He asked if making the room a <br />little bigger and getting rid of the balcony is something that can be worked out. <br />Commissioner Balch stated that he has gone down this road before, and the <br />Commission can go a long way and get to the same exact spot. He recommended that <br />the Commission either immediately continue the item or immediately make a motion <br />and vote or informally say where each one sits so the Commission knows where it <br />stands. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 27, 2015 Page 14 of 18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.