CCMIN011984 - Laserfiche WebLink

The following persons spoke in opposition to the application: Mr. John P. Corley, Attorney representing Frank Auf der Maur, developer of the property, stated that the developer has placed deed restrictions on 34 of the 35 lots in this area, and felt that it should apply to this lot as well in order to retain the good planning for the total parcel. He stated that to allow this exception would set a precedent. Mr. Corley requested that no exception be made to the 30 foot setback requirement, and mentioned possible litigation regarding this matter. Mr. Frank Capilla, 9 Twelve Oaks Drive, stated he has purchased two lots in this area and asked if he would be entitled to the 20 foot setback exception, if the application of Northwood Homes is approved. Mr. Ronald Harrison rebutted by stating it is his opinion that he is only asking for What he is entitled to, since he had no previous knowledge from the developer of this restriction and he had no criteria to follow except the City criteria. He felt the rule should not apply to his property. He stated that his development is aesthe- tically pleasing and would enhance the business park. He added that if there is any legal action that it should be between the developers, and not involving the City. There being no further testimony, Mayor Butler declared the public hearing closed on the application and the negative declaration. Councilmember Mercer stated that the developer has tried to do something unique with his development and he felt the small amount of setback that does not meet the 30 foot setback requirement would not be a detriment to the other property in this area. Mayor Butler stated that if Mr. Auf der Maur had placed the setback restriction on all of the property, this hearing would not be necessary, and at this point it must be determined'whether or not this layout is appropriate. He stated he did not think the small percentage of the building that is 20 feet from the curb would adversely impact the area and he was not convinced that there could be a better plan if redone. After further discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Brandes, and seconded by Councilmember Wood, that Resolution No. 84-20, denying the appeal of Northwood Homes for a decision of the Design Review Board denying Case Z-83-235, an application for design review for a three building commercial service/office/warehouse complex pro- posed for the approximately 2 acre site located at 39 California Avenue, be adopted. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers Brandes, Mohr, and Wood NOES: Councilmember Mercer and Mayor Butler ABSENT: None Because of the above action taken by Council, no action was required or taken on the Negative Declaration submitted in connection with this application. Application of the City of Pleasanton to amend the provisions of the zoning ordinance with respect to parking requirements in the Central Business District Mr. Harris pre~ented his report (SR 84:07) dated January 9, 1984, recommending that this item be continued indefinitely so that the downtown design consultants re- cently hired by the City and Chamber of Commerce will have an opportunity to review the proposed study, and that if, as a result of this review additional modification are needed, the matter would have to be referred back to the Planning Commission for a report and recommendation prior to final action by Council. After discussion, Mayor Butler declared this item continued indefinitely pending additional information. lo. 1/9/s4