My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN090595
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
CCMIN090595
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:54:18 AM
Creation date
5/20/1999 11:33:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Ms. Michelotti asks if it is just the points of the porches that are encroaching on the <br /> property line. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift replied yes. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver opened the public hearing. <br /> <br /> Ms. Kim Wirtz, Kaufman and Broad, had worked with the homeowners to process the <br /> PUD minor modification. She had confirmed with Ms. Grant that Kaufman and Broad will <br /> modify her porch. The problem wasn't immediately noticed because the porches were not <br /> shown on the plot plans. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti asked if the drainage problem would be addressed at the same time also. <br /> <br /> Ms. Wirtz stated she had talked to the Customer Service Department, and believed it had <br /> adequately taken care of Ms. Turner's drainage concerns. The Department was notified that Ms. <br /> Grant might have drainage problems so it will meet with her and bring out a geologist if deemed <br /> necessary. <br /> <br /> Ms. Susan Grant, 3373 Hadsell Court, supported the PUD modification. She is <br /> concerned about the value of her home if the PUD modification does not go through. Her <br /> property will have a zero lot line. She is frustrated with the builder and felt it does not follow <br /> through on its commitments. She hoped, however, that Council will approve the modification <br /> of the PUD. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti commented that the developer had made a good faith gesture at the <br /> meeting to help Ms. Grant with the problems in her home. There will be another meeting with <br /> the developer, the Mayor and staff to discuss the problems. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis asked if there was a time constraint in making a decision on this PUD <br /> modification or was there time for the Mayor to meet with the residents first. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift replied that there was not a time constraint. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush stated that he could not suggest that Council adopt additional conditions. He <br /> felt the better thing to do was to postpone the decision, allow the process to be worked through <br /> and see if those things can be worked out, rather than attaching it as a condition of this PUD <br /> modification. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr asked if this could be continued until after the meeting with the Mayor. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush suggested a 60-75 day cap if that much time is needed, rather than have the <br />-- issue postponed indefinitely. <br /> <br /> 09/05/95 -8- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.