Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Goldsworthy went on to say that he felt staff was very capable, ut did not think it was <br />wise to base a decision as important as a house design on one person s conclusion. He felt <br />that eliminating the Board would just create more appeals; that with five-member Board at <br />least five opinions were given. He did not think it would cost less to eliminate the Board, <br />but might create costly mistakes at some future time. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br /> <br />Commissioner Michelotti also felt that with a five-member Board, it as more fair to an <br />applicant rather than just having one staff person look at the plans. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued as to the conflict of interest issue. Mr. Goldswo <br />it almost impossible for a Board member to practice in Pleasanton. <br />firm would not be able to talk to staff about a case he would be rep <br /> <br />y said that issue makes <br />ven a member of his <br />senting. <br /> <br />Chairman Hovingh stated he is also opposed to eliminating the Desig Review Board and did <br />not think its elimination would help speed the approval process or cu costs. <br /> <br />Commissioner Mahern stated that she publicly disagreed with the Be nomic Development <br />Committee's reasoning that the approval process time would be short ned. In fact, she stated <br />that in her job she finds Pleasanton to be the fastest, along with chea er fees. She reiterated <br />that she felt the only real issue is the conflict of interest problem, bu that with adequate <br />advertising they could probably find enough professionals who would not be economically <br />hurt by serving on the Board. <br /> <br />Commissioner Michelotti stated that it helped her do her job as a PI ning Commissioner if <br />she has the Design Review Board minutes to read in regard to an ap lication. In that way, <br />she knows that a case has already been scrutinized as far as design is ues are concerned and <br />she can thus devote her attention to other matters of the case. Com issioner Mahern agreed <br />with that assessment. <br /> <br /> <br />Mr. Goldsworthy reiterated that he felt the Design Review Board ha done a good job and <br />felt that the fair practice issue could be worked out. <br /> <br />Valerie Morrow, 570 Bonita Avenue, spoke as a past Design Review Board member. She <br />said she totally agreed with Mr. Goldsworthy's comments. She add that as a whole staff <br />does an excellent job of conditioning an application, but noted there ere some things the <br />Board caught that staff had missed. She felt there were some cases here the Board greatly <br />differed with staff. In regard to the fair practice issue, she felt there were a number of <br />professionals who could serve on the Board if the positions were adv rtised adequately or <br />even if professionals were sought out. In general, she said she woul be sorry to see the <br />Board disbanded and would be disturbed to see it done under the gui e of economics. <br /> <br />Bob Sanchez, 3017 Melbourne, spoke in support of retaining the De "gn Review Board and <br />felt that their input helped the applicant and the architect. He did no think disbanding it <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes January 27, 1993 <br /> <br />Page 10 <br />