PC 01/27/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Goldsworthy went on to say that he felt staff was very capable but did not think it was wise to base a decision as important as a house design on one pers n's conclusion. He felt that eliminating the Board would just create more appeals; that wi a five-member Board at least five opinions were given. He did not think it would cost less 0 eliminate the Board, but might create costly mistakes at some future time. Commissioner Michelotti also felt that with a five-member Board, i was more fair to an applicant rather than just having one staff person look at the plans. Discussion ensued as to the conflict of interest issue. Mr. Goldswo hy said that issue makes it almost impossible for a Board member to practice in Pleasanton. Even a member of his firm would not be able to talk to staff about a case he would be rep esenting. Chairman Hovingh stated he is also opposed to eliminating the Desi n Review Board and did not think its elimination would help speed the approval process or c t costs. Commissioner Mahern stated that she publicly disagreed with the onomic Development Committee's reasoning that the approval process time would be sho ened. In fact, she stated that in her job she finds Pleasanton to be the fastest, along with ch per fees. She reiterated that she felt the only real issue is the conflict of interest problem, b t that with adequate advertising they could probably find enough professionals who woul not be economically hurt by serving on the Board. Commissioner Michelotti stated that it helped her do her job as a PI ning Commissioner if she has the Design Review Board minutes to read in regard to an ap lication. In that way, she knows that a case has already been scrutinized as far as design i sues are concerned and she can thus devote her attention to other matters of the case. Com issioner Mahern agreed with that assessment. Mr. Goldsworthy reiterated that he felt the Design Review Board ha done a good job and felt that the fair practice issue could be worked out. Valerie Morrow, 570 Bonita Avenue, spoke as a past Design Revie Board member. She said she totally agreed with Mr. Goldsworthy's comments. She add that as a whole staff does an excellent job of conditioning an application, but noted there ere some things the Board caught that staff had missed. She felt there were some cases here the Board greatly differed with staff. In regard to the fair practice issue, she felt there were a number of professionals who could serve on the Board if the positions were adv rtised adequately or even if professionals were sought out. In general, she said she woul be sorry to see the Board disbanded and would be disturbed to see it done under the gui e of economics. Bob Sanchez, 3017 Melbourne, spoke in support of retaining the De 'gn Review Board and felt that their input helped the applicant and the architect. He did no think disbanding it Planning Commission Minutes January 27, 1993 Page 10