Laserfiche WebLink
“Special lighting will be allowed but must not be a nuisance”; and (2) Add a new <br />condition requiring that the full menu be made available at all times when alcoholic <br />beverages are served. <br />Chairperson Fox seconded the motion. <br /> <br /> <br />Ms. Decker requested that the Planning Commission amend Condition No. 4 which <br />was not addressed in the staff memo, addressing payment of sewer fees to the City of <br />Livermore/City of Pleasanton. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank and Chairperson Fox accepted the proposed amendment. <br /> <br />Ms. Decker requested that a condition be added to clarify in the PUD guidelines <br />whether or not the home should comply with the R-1-6,500 or the R-1-20,000 <br />standard. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank and Chairperson Fox indicated their preference for the <br />R-1-20,000 standard. Commissioner Blank suggested the language “not to exceed <br />6,600 square feet.” Chairperson Fox stated that she could support that language. <br /> <br />Ms. Decker recommended that the Planning Commission consider a garage <br />exemption of approximately 700 square feet as is typical for contemporary custom <br />homes. <br /> <br />Chairperson Fox noted that she would support the R-1-20,000 standard, plus the addition <br />suggested by Ms. Decker. However, if the percentages were to exceed the R-1-20,000, <br />she would like the matter to return to the Planning Commission rather that have a staff- <br />level design review. She noted that the neighbors indicated that the smaller homes were <br />at the front area of Ruby Hill. <br /> <br />Ms. Decker suggested supporting the proposed design review process as a staff-level <br />review rather than a two-phase process. She advised that this project was for a <br />recommendation by the Planning Commission, not an approval. <br /> <br />Chairperson Fox reiterated that she would prefer it to be R-1-20,000 and would not be <br />able to support to the amendment. She retracted her second to the initial motion. <br /> <br />Commissioner Narum seconded the amended motion. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pearce did not believe the $5,500 fee for removing non-heritage tree <br />was in the spirit of the Heritage Tree Ordinance and proposed that Condition <br />No. 28 of Exhibit B-1 be deleted. <br /> <br />Commissioners Blank and Narum accepted the proposed amendment. <br /> <br /> <br />Chairperson Fox inquired whether the restaurant and house could be the subject of <br />separate votes. Ms. Decker noted that would not be advisable because it was one PUD. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 9, 2007 Page 11 of 20 <br /> <br /> <br />