Laserfiche WebLink
383 <br /> <br />Pleasanton Downtown; Niles Canyon Train; Ruby Hill ProjeCt <br /> <br /> Mr. Stanley Rathbone, 325 Ray Street, indicated that any <br />street realignment or beautification project in Downtown Pleasanton <br />would destroy the downtown area. He then proposed that the regular <br />commute train be extended from Stockton through the Niles Canyon to <br />the BART station to be built in Pleasanton. He also pointed out <br />that the Ruby Hill Project belongs to Livemore and that any <br />annexation agreement should include a stipulation that the Jack <br />Nicklaus golf course would not use any water hazards in view of the <br />critical water situation in the Valley. <br /> <br />6. PUBLIC HEARINGS <br />Item 6a <br />Z-91-134, Swan Pools/Whitelaw and Debra Wriqht, Application for <br />Design Review Approval to Regrade a Portion of an Existinq Lot to <br />Accommodate a Swimminq Pool to Be Located at 2916 Amoroso Court <br />(Tract 5835, Lot 6) (SR 91:333) <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer declared the public hearing open on the <br />application. <br /> <br /> Mr. Whitelaw Wright, 2916 Amoroso Court, stated that it took <br />him 9½ weeks to get a permit to put a pool into his backyard. He <br />commented that Condition No. 4 of the Conditions of Approval is <br />unreasonable in requiring the property owner to install the <br />landscaping within six months of the pool's completion and to <br />maintain such landscaping in perpetuity, including replacing any <br />plant that dies with an identical plant material within 30 days. <br />He indicated that this condition was not in the CC&Rs or the <br />preliminary and final title reports when he purchased the house. <br /> <br /> There being no further testimony, Mr. Mercer declared the <br />public hearing closed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver informed Mr. Wright that because of what the <br />neighbors have had to deal with in the past, Staff is trying to <br />find a way to allow new property owners like himself to have a pool <br />while protecting the privacy rights of the neighbors. He indicated <br />that the new neighbors were notified of the project's conditions <br />and asked Mr. Swift when this notification should have taken place. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift replied that the CC&Rs include a condition with <br />respect to regrading but does not lay out the procedures for the <br />installation of swimming pools. He continued that Condition No. 4 <br />could be modified to address Mr. Wright's concern by referring <br />specifically to the replacement of the trees planted by the <br />developer along the back property line, which is the key issue in <br />the subdivisions. <br /> <br /> - 4 - <br /> 8-20-91 <br /> <br /> <br />