SR 06:245 - Laserfiche WebLink

In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Blank regarding whether Mr. Iserson was acceptable to all parties as a mediator, Ms. Decker replied that the parties had been informed that he would be the mediator, and staff had not received any negative feedback. Ms. Decker noted that since February, there had been a lack of confidence on staffs ability to mediate; however, there was a great deal of confidence in utilizing Mr. Iserson's mediation skills to reach a resolution. Commissioner Fox inquired whether the City had considered obtaining a volunteer mediator, such as a former Planning Commissioner. Chairperson Arkin believed that was a good idea. Staff responded that this had not been considered. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Dennis Georgatos, appellant, noted that after staff suggested mediation, he had been hopeful that a mutual compromise could be reached. He received an email from Ms. Amos that staff would contact all parties regarding how the mediation would proceed. He received a communication from Ms. Decker that the City could not fund its share of the costs. He did not believe that City staff informed the other parties, including Mrs. Wensel, Mr. Bennett, and Mr. Imperiale, whether they would be willing to bear a greater share of the 25-percent mediation costs they had agreed to cover. They were informed that the item would be placed on the agenda for a decision. He noted that they are not blocking the Knights from remodeling their home but wished it to be modified so it would not block their view and encroach on their privacy. He took exception to the Commissioners' comments that it would be insane for them not to want a seven-foot fence. He believed that a seven-foot fence would create a boxed-in environment for them. Except for the Zoning Administrator's requirement of transom windows in the master bedroom and two trees in the back yard, there was a minimum of concessions that the Knights had made and they expected the City to require more. He noted that the Knights have never offered to downsize their expansion. He believed that expansion in that location was out of proportion for the neighborhood. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Pearce regarding whether he would be amenable to the selection of Jerry Iserson to mediate this matter, Mr. Georgatos noted that he had just learned of this option. He believed the City had become an advocate for this project and had a vested interest in its approval, and, therefore, he would prefer an independent mediator. Stan Knight, applicant, noted that the suggestion to use transom windows and remove the other windows would not be allowed due to legal egress issues; larger windows must be placed somewhere to meet Code standards. He noted that for most new homes in Pleasanton, 3,000 square feet would be considered less than standard and emphasized that their design did not exceed the City's allowable footprint standards. He did not believe the residents who enjoyed an open view when their bought their homes were entitled to that same view in perpetuity. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Pearce regarding whether he would be amenable to Mr. Iserson or a former Planning Commissioner acting in a volunteer capacity to mediate this issue, Mr. Knight replied that he had no problem with that. He was concerned about the length of time the mediation process may add to his project timeline and would be willing to work with EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, June 28, 2006 Page 30f 5