Laserfiche WebLink
hammerhead was proposed to be in the approximate place as it is now. The plan at that time was <br />that the property owner would acquire the triangle of property from Mrs. Ku. Mrs. Ku has <br />subsequently sold her property to someone else who is not participating in the development. <br />Because he could not acquire the Ku property, the fire truck turnaround would have to be on lot <br />four. There was a proposal to move the house back toward the slope so it would meet the <br />setback requirements. The plans being proposed today have not changed significantly. He wants <br />to be able to build the house away from the slope and trees. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver said the plans show a lot line adjustment. Does the lot line adjustment <br />coincide with the conditions of approval? <br /> <br /> Mr. Thomas said he paid Mr. Nelson to acquire an easement, instead of the lot line <br />adjustment. He also has an agreement from Mr. Nelson to use part of the triangle as part of the <br />yard. It would not be advantageous to measure the setback from the fire track ramaround. Rather <br />it should be measured from the side of the tumaround. He also requested that the planned unit <br />development plan not have an expiration date or at least, have an expiration date of five years. In <br />regards to the grading, he said to the best of his knowledge no dirt has been moved around or <br />flattened out since 1991. He said the adjacent property owner dumped some dirt on the lot to <br />store it temporarily, which has since been removed. He said there might be some dirt left <br />creating a look that dirt has been moved around. He said he did not put the dirt there. He agreed <br />that there is an unnatural looking knoll area by the Nelsons' property. He said the knoll was <br />there when the original planned unit development plan was created. He said the dispute is a <br />private matter and felt the matter should not be discussed at this meeting. He did say that Mr. <br />Nelson wanted the tumaround lowered. This resulted in a larger shoulder than originally <br />planned. He understood Mr. Nelson did not want much grading done out there, but Mr. Thomas <br />felt it is not his responsibility to resolve. The dirt is on Mr. Nelson's lot. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico understood Mr. Thomas was asking for the setback to be determined from a <br />portion of Mr. Nelson's property. <br /> <br /> Mr. Thomas said he has an easement for this. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico said the plan shows a curb requirement. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swirl said the plan Mr. Pico was referring to was not used to build Bethel Lane. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico asked if the original plan had a curb requirement. <br /> <br /> Mr. Thomas said the original construction drawing was not approved with a curb. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico asked if the original planned unit development plan showed a curb. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift did not recall. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 11 11/17/98 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />