SR 05:258 - Laserfiche WebLink

In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Roberts on why the six-foot high storage bin was not incorporated in the back of the carport, Ms. Decker replied that she would check with the applicant. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Blank regarding whether the project would have a homeowners association or maintenance association, Ms. Nerland confirmed that a homeowners association was required when there was commonly owned property. A maintenance association is a separate legal entity that did not own property. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Ron Winter, applicant, 2680 Turnstone Drive, believed that the project had been in process for so long that a workshop was not necessary. He believed it was important to provide housing for young married couples who historically could not live in Pleasanton. He noted that black walnut trees were very messy. He added that he had formed a maintenance association for other properties, which was not as much of a financial burden as a homeowners association. He expected to price the houses at $500,000, which was not technically affordable but was workable for young working couples. He noted that the storage units would not be higher than the fences and added that the houses and carports had sprinklers for fire safety; there would be no storage in the carports for that reason. While working with the Pleasanton Downtown Association (PDA), he noted that the in-lieu parking fee was chosen instead of a tree fee. Matt DePretis, 1775 Baywood Court, spoke in favor of this project and noted that projects like this would enable his children to stay in town once they're grown. Zeke Palma, 3275 Monaghan Street, Dublin, spoke in support of this application and noted that he would like to buy a similar type of home. Steve Goldsworthy, 210 Lawrence Lane, Brentwood, spoke in support of this project and added that he grew up in Pleasanton. He believed this type of project was very important, given the high housing prices in Pleasanton, particularly in the Downtown. Robert Byrd, 205 Neal Street, noted that he supported the Downtown but did not support this project. He presented a petition regarding this project. He did not believe the applicants generally spoke for people who lived and did business in the Downtown. He agreed with Art Buckley's assessment that this project's main problem was the negative visual impact on the immediate neighborhood. He believed there should have been a neighborhood workshop and noted that Downtown residents and business owners had not been consulted. He disagreed with the applicant's statement that the next-door bungalow did not have a garage; that home has a garage and all the required on-site parking. He distributed a report regarding the PDA's recommendation of a $28,000 in-lieu parking fee. He did not believe this project fit the character ofthe Downtown. Emil Oxsen, 730 Peters Avenue, noted that he lived next door to the proposed project and noted that any approved project would have a significant effect on his family. He expressed concern about parking, which was already a problem; he noted that the street in front of his house was full of cars during the evening hours. He was also concerned about the density on the lot and did not believe this site was appropriate for affordable housing. He expressed concern that the EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, May 11, 2005 Page 3 of5