My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN030293
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1993
>
CCMIN030293
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:54:51 AM
Creation date
10/28/1999 11:08:38 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.
/
10
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
109 <br /> <br />design professionals to be a part of this process. He believed <br />design guidelines and landscape plans can be interpreted by staff, <br />but not all projects fit neatly in the guidelines. That is when a <br />professional is needed. There is an overriding concern with the <br />quality of design of projects in this community. <br /> <br /> A1 Dutchover, 1687 Holly Circle, Design Review Board member, <br />shared his support in keeping the Design Review Board. He too was <br />concerned with the quality of projects in Pleasanton. He believed <br />architects will present a better plan when they know their work <br />will be critiqued by other professionals. Mr. Dutchover asked <br />Council to consider this carefully before making a decision that <br />may be a mistake. He was also concerned about the additional staff <br />time it will take to assume the Design Review Board duties. <br /> <br /> Gene Finch, 8019 Jorgensen Lane, felt that it was important <br />that Council maintain the Design Review Board as it is today. The <br />Board looks at the total project, not piecemeal. Mr. Finch did not <br />understand why this was being eliminated because there has not been <br />any support heard to do so. <br /> <br /> Robert Cordtz, 262 W. Angela, concurred with staff <br />recommendation. He requested that a list of qualified architects <br />be developed and distributed as each project is being reviewed. <br /> <br /> Valerie Morrow, 570 Bonita Avenue, previous member of Design <br />Review Board, felt that the City has not made a significant effort <br />to recruit public practice as well as non-residential <br />professionals. She believed that there is an advantage to having <br />a board rather than a single consultant. She asked that the Board <br />be maintained as is and the conflict of. interest issue resolved. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver asked if Ms. Morrow believed that there are <br />design professionals in this community without conflicts of <br />interest who could staff the Design Review Board. <br /> <br /> Ms. Morrow said yes. She added that she was aware of <br />landscape architects, a civil traffic engineer, and an interior <br />specialist who would be interested. <br /> <br /> Jack Hovingh, 4250 Muirwood Drive, believed that anybody <br />seeking to assist staff should be required to be licensed by the <br />state. He supported maintainingthe Design Review Board because it <br />gives the public a chance to be heard by way of public hearings, <br />early in the process. He concluded that the Board should exist to <br />insulate staff from the direct line of fire from Council or public. <br /> <br /> There being no further testimony, Mr. Tarver declared the <br />public hearing closed. <br /> <br />3/2/93 5 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.