PC 071316 - Laserfiche WebLink

Houston: Thank you very much. Chair Ritter: Okay, anybody else who would like to speak, please bring your yellow card up. I have one speaker card for this Diane Kolb? Diane Kolb: I live on Dublin Canyon Road; the Lester property. I have a question. When we got City water, Pleasanton said we had to cap our wells. If we got the City water, the wells had to be capped. We had livestock and we capped our wells. This project, why is there a project of them keeping their well if they're going to have City water? What happens? Why were we mandatorily required to get rid of our wells, yet there's a well. That was my main concern because you made us cap ours. When we used City water and when the creek goes dry, it's our water that feeds the livestock and I don't understand why we had to close ours. It was 2 wells. Thank you. I just wanted to bring that up. John Wiegand: Good evening. I'm glad to be back here tonight. I am the corporation president for the Pleasant View Church of Christ and we have some of our members here tonight in support of our proposal. We emphasized when we were here in January this sale is going to be an incredible benefit to the church. We've always been able to maintain our operating budget in balance but we've never really had the ability to bring some capital improvements to the property that are necessary to our situation. For example, we've been using septic tanks. We really need to hook up to the City of Pleasanton's sewer system. The cost of that is at least $95,000. We need to repave the driveway, repave the paved part of the parking lot and pave the gravel pit. That's going to cost about $75,000 and there's a number of infrastructure issues in our building; matters that were compliant with the code that was in place at the time the building was constructed but we really want to bring the building up to code now and that's going to cost $300,000 to $350,000. So there has been a lot of controversy in Pleasanton about churches wanting to sell their property and leaving the community. We want to sell this unused part of our property because we are committed to staying in this community and the funds from selling this unused part of the property is what's going to allow us to be able to do this. We heard the comments in January about wanting to make this project consistent with the General Plan so we worked with our developer and I think we now have, to my understanding, without having any expertise in this area, we're now compliant with the General Plan so we're asking for your approval of the project. Thank you. Chair Ritter: All right, that's the last speaker card so we'll pull it back to the Commission and decide what we want to do. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Balch: I'll come forth and say I was the one that asked about the well question. I asked about it mostly because the condition was initially drafted to say the well could potentially be used for construction as well as irrigation after the fact and given that I know construction water for dust mitigation and what not can be significant, I didn't personally want the well or potable water being used for that. I wanted recycled water to be used. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 13, 2016 Page 7 of 38 'L