Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~. <br />Commissioner Gibbs expressed a choice for the varied exteriors. <br />Co®issioner Antonini expressed a desire to keep at least the two exteriors. <br />Vice Chairman Pona referred to the advantage of maintaining only the one exterior <br />from a financial savings viewpoint, while conceding that the variety of exteriors <br />would be more attractive. <br />The green areas would be maintained by the management with an incentive program <br />for the occupants. This was called "incentive maintenance." The money saved <br />in the project by having the individual occupants maintain their own lawn areas <br />would be deposited in an account. When the resident left the project, he would <br />receive the monies plus interest. <br />Vice Chairman Pons inquired if the units would contain dishwashers. The reply <br />was that it would depend on the price of the townhouses. <br />The Planning Director, in going back to the type of exteriors, favored the <br />Spanish throughout, or failing that, would lean toward the California Rustic. <br />Dr. Long then requested the Commissioners' feelings as to how his group should <br />continue in this project and requested copies of the minutes which he felt <br />might be of some assistance to him. <br />Mr. Gene Rega, Councilman, was present and made reference to the density of the <br />park area in the vicinity of Pleasanton Greens. In considering the change of the <br />park designation, perhaps other designations should also be considered at the time <br />of the change. <br />Vice Chairman Pons advised Chat as far as the site plan is concertned, he concurred <br />with it personally. The other Coamisaionera expressed a like viewpoint. <br />The question was also asked if this item had been referred to the Parks and <br />Recreation Commission. Ttie reply was no. <br />In their viewpoint, the Commissioners felt the plan was a valid one and that <br />they liked it. <br />d. RZ-69-12. Corlev 6 Schwab <br />Application to rezone from the R-1-6500 (Single Family) District to the 0 (Office) <br />District that property commonly known as 1056 Division Street. <br />Vice Chairman Pons opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Castro advised that upon request <br />of the applicant, that this item be continued. <br />Mrs. Vesta Fish was in the audience and expressed her opinion that this type of <br />spot zoning would be very bad for the preservation of the downtown district <br />for the business and office areas. She felt the Arroyo was a good buffer between <br />the single-family and the downtown area and the separation of the residential <br />and the commercial should not be violated. <br />Upon motion of Vice Chairman Pons, seconded by Commissioner Antonini, and carried, <br />the Public Hearing was continued. <br />Upon motion of Commissioner Antonini, seconded by Commissioner Gibbs, and carried, <br />the following resolution was adopted unanimously. <br />- 6 - <br />