Laserfiche WebLink
~y$~-3AHTOy CITY of PLEASANTON <br />~ ~'i . <br />~~,:ot Planning Commission <br />.~..o. <br />MINUTES ~OF REGULAR MEETING. <br />~ Ot8 July 13, 1971 <br />Time : s:oo PM <br />PIaCe; Pleasanton Justice Court <br />Again Chairman Garrigan advised Mr. Grot <br />that what is needed at this time is his <br />signature on the letter, then things may <br />proceed accordingly. <br />Mr. Castro advised the Commission that he <br />had previously gone out and viewed the pro- <br />ject and felt that the yellow color was in <br />keeping with the earth tones applied to the <br />building. He further indicated that the <br />colors are subjective and it is difficult <br />to agree on those basis. Chairman Garrigan <br />stated he didn't feel that the colors are <br />the problem, that the drainage and land- <br />scaping are the most critical things to be <br />resolved, <br />There were some questions as to whether the <br />cash bond would cover the cost of correcting <br />the drainage and landscaping. Mr. Castro <br />advised him that this figure was arrived at <br />by the City Attorney and MacKay and Somps, <br />and further advised that this amount appeare <br />to be a proper figure and he couldn't furthe <br />amend or revise it. <br />Commissioner Hirst directed questions to the <br />Director of Public Works and the City Manage <br />Mr. Campbell stated that he was not aware of <br />the problem, that in his opinion this is an <br />on-site problem to be resolved by Planning. <br />The City Manager expressed no comments on <br />the issue. <br />Commissioner Pons expressed the concern and <br />the desire to work things out between the <br />City and Mr. Grotenhuis. He felt that the <br />essential corrections to be made were drains <br />and landscaping and he felt that painting <br />was irrelevant and could be solved by the <br />letter prepared by the City Attorney. <br />-4- <br />