CCMIN061990 - Laserfiche WebLink

281 Mr. Martin Inderbitzen, 62 West Neal Street, representing Judge Bill Gale and Castlewood Country Club, owners of property outside Pleasanton's City limits, expressed some concern about how the proposed ordinance may affect these properties if these are later annexed to the City. He stated that a subdivision for the creation of two additional lots has been requested for Judge Gale's property through the County. He explained that each lot would be over an acre, with a depth of about 300 feet and a heavily wooded rear portion that increases deeply in grade. A setback requirement of 150 feet would involve severe re-grading and the removal of many trees. He suggested that a provision be added to Section 18.78.010.B. Properties not subject to the district's regulations. to exempt existing lots of record not only as of the date of adoption of the proposed ordinance, but also at the time these are annexed to the City. Mr. Mert Van Dreser, President of Castlewood Property Owners Association, indicated that he was in favor of the Guidelines and asked Council to consider requests for amendments seriously before making any changes. He stated that not all projects outside the City limits are similar to Judge Gale's. He added that Diamond Properties is currently proposing the development through the County of 20 homes in an approximately nine acre lot within the Castlewood area and that the proposal differs significantly from the proposed ordinance's height, setback and visibility requirements. Mr. Jerry Dommer, Architect and Planner for Bill and Betty Currin, owners of Oak Tree Farm at 8015 Foothill, stated that although the project has received approval from the County, the owners are considering annexation to the City of Pleasanton and developing under Pleasanton. He inquired how the proposed ordinance would affect the project. Mr. Mercer asked Mr. Roush if the proposed ordinance would affect properties outside the City limits. Mr. Roush replied that the proposed ordinance would not apply, per Se, to properties outside the City limits; however, without the qualifying language suggested by Mr. Inderbitzen, if the property is annexed before those lots are created, the ordinance would apply. Mr. Michael Kliment, 5142 Foothill Road, inquired if the ordinance would affect remodeling existing homes in the area, including tearing one down and putting up another. Mr. Swift replied that if it is a lot of record, it would not be affected by the requirements. Mr. Kliment commented that he preferred the original document which exempted parcels of two acres or less because the proposed ordinance would put a severe constraint on the few lots in the area that are between one and two acres. He suggested that staff - 5 - 6-19-90