My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN071889
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1989
>
CCMIN071889
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:51:41 AM
Creation date
11/3/1999 10:46:45 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.
/
24
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
163 <br /> <br />problems. He also brought up PUD-83-9-1M which provided for the <br />relocation of the recreation room and pool with no mention of the <br />laundry facility. He stated that the recreation room was supposed <br />to be expanded over to the old laundry facility and washers and <br />dryers were to be installed in each of the units. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer clarified that the issue in question was the tot <br />lot, the car wash and the RV parking; not washers and dryers in <br />each unit or the recreation building. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cassens responded that based on his discussion with the <br />City Attorney, he understood that approval of the Site Plan by the <br />Council would lock in whatever is already built. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer answered that the Council could approve the <br />application presented and consider the washer and dryer issue at a <br />subsequent time. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cassens stated that at the Council meeting that discussed <br />the washer and dryer issue, the four Councilmembers present - <br />Mercer, Mohr, Wood, and Mayor Butler - voted in favor. <br /> <br /> Ms. Linda Cassens, 4082 Suffolk Way, expressed some concern <br />about the City's continued approval of the developers' proposals <br />when conditions to the original agreement have not been complied <br />with. <br /> <br /> Ms. Kathryn Cardwell, Resident Manager of Gatewood <br />Apartments, emphasized that Gatewood was their home, and, <br />therefore, they ought to have the same rights and privileges as <br />homeowners have. She stated that handling problems in the <br />property was part of the on-site manager's job. With the <br />Maintenance Manager and four out of the six other people who work <br />at the complex living on the property, they had no problem <br />monitoring noise as their units are in different locations in the <br />property. <br /> <br /> Mr. Gregg Wilkinson, Maintenance Manager of Gatewwod <br />Apartments, mentioned that they police the place more strictly <br />than anyone else does. He pointed out the necessity of having a <br />place to park their RVs as they are presently parked all over the <br />property. No complaints have been made about this, but it has <br />become an issue since a specific site has been proposed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Donald Reynolds, 2903 Yorkshire Court, asked if the City <br />had any ordinance against parking RVs and boats. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer stated that RVs and boats may be parked on city <br />streets for 72 hours. A city ordinance allows them to be parked <br />on one's own property, around the side of the house, properly <br />screened, and without encroaching within setbacks. <br /> <br /> -7- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.