PC 06/08/83 - Laserfiche WebLink

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION June 8, 1983 Commissioner Lindsey felt comfortable with the changes proposed and believed the requested modification to be minor. He had concerns with garages being used for storage instead of for vehicles. Commissioner Getty supported this position. She further stated that the design changes reflect what is happening right across the street. She indicated she supported carports for the development across the street. Commissioner Wilson asked to see the letter approving the modification. Brian W. Swift, Assistant City Attorney, indicated that this project needs to have a final map filed for it by late July to keep the RAP valid. He indicated the issue is whether or not the Planning Commission feels the proposed changes are minor or major. Commissioner Wilson indicated it is his opinion that the changes are major. Mr. Harris stated that the improvement plans are now being checked by the Engineering Department and reiterated that RAP runs out on this development July 22, 1983 if the map isn't finaled. Commissioner Lindsey then asked staff to explain why they felt the changes were minor. Mr. Harris responded the project will not be changed significantly in that bedrooms will be changed from three to two and there will still be 24 units and they will remain two-story units; tri-plexes and duplexes will now be four-plexes. He further stated this is probably a lesser change than that granted for Valley Business Park when they changed their street pattern. Commissioner Doherty asked about City Council's decision to grant the project immediately across the street from this one the conversion of garages to carports. Mr. Harris responded that City Council dial not grant the applicant's request. Commissioner Doherty indicated he has no problem with having a special meeting to discuss the proposed changes so that the applicant wouldn't lose his RAP approvals but didn't feel the changes were minor. Per. Harris indicated that if a notice went to the paper and property owners 6/9/83 the soonest a meeting could be held would be 6/22/83 and then it would still have to go to City Council. Art Dunkley, Castlewood Properties, Inc., 205-F Main Street, Pleasanton, was concerned that the soonest the matter could go to Council after a Planning Commission would be in July and then there would be a 30 day referendum period. The Assistant City Attorney indicated that generally modifications are handled by resolution and therefore would become effective immediately upon passage and adoption. Mr. Dunkley rebutted the request for a public hearing in that he has to pay fees, dedicate property, provide a pump site, submit plans for the alignment of Pico and have all of this accomplished by 7/22/83 causing an extreme difficulty in proceeding with the project and completing it on time. He indicated that he would be very willing to have the carports covered under a conditional use permit whereby if it did not work. to the satisfaction of the City, they could be converted immediately to garages. -2- ,w . ~__ ~ ,_ _ _ _