My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
14 ATTACHMENT 04
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2008
>
052008
>
14 ATTACHMENT 04
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/15/2008 2:39:06 PM
Creation date
5/15/2008 2:39:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
5/20/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
14 ATTACHMENT 04
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
104
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
Page 1 of 2 <br />Natalie Amos <br />From: Terry Besso , _ <br />Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 12:32 PM <br />To: Natalie Amos <br />Cc: Kryssa Cooper; Russ Berry <br />Subject: Lemoine Ranch Estates <br />Natalie, <br />The below email is from our HOA president, Russ Berry and his response to Steve Spenser concerning the <br />discussion of the easements nt our annual HOA meeting this Wednesday evening. I believe he has outlined <br />the questions that have come up in discussion concerning the easements in our neighborhood. This is in line <br />with the email I sent last week while you were out of the office. <br />It would be appreciated if we could get a response from the city planning department if we are using the <br />right approach to solve the easement issue in order to tell the homeowners the direction the HOA board is <br />going to take. <br />I thank you for your response by tomorrow. <br />From: Russ Berry ..______ <br />Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 6:01 PM <br />To: Steven Spencer <br />Cc: Terry Besso; Kryssa Cooper <br />Subject: RE: Steve Spencer <br />Hi Steve: <br />Essentially, because there is conflicting information relative to whether or not the City will allow aneighborhood- <br />wide changing of the PUD (and associated "set-back" requirements) we thought the best approach would be to <br />request that City officials come to the site and observe the situation directly. During that site meeting we would <br />work to obtain a final commitment from them to: A) Grandfather in those already approved improvements, B) <br />Allow a 5' set back for all lots except the three lots with the smaller rear yards, C) Confirm what set back would be <br />allowed within the three lots with smaller rear yards, inspecting those that have already been improved to see if all <br />"clears" or what changes must be made, if any, if improvements are currently within the 5' requirement, D) To <br />ensure the City will grant the above under a minor PUD change (assuming we have unanimous consent within <br />the HOA) and what specifically the process and timing would be... <br />Through the above approach, we hope to remove any conflicting information that may have been brought back <br />from the various discussions with the City, and get the information directly from them based upon our ability to <br />achieve what we want (hopefully) via the on site inspections/meeting... <br />I hope this satisfactorily outlines the current situation for you... I apologize for the delay in getting back with you, <br />but our various schedules have made it tough to meet... <br />I hope all is going well for you in New York... <br />Regards, <br />RWB <br />Russell W. Berry <br />Senior Vice President <br />1 /22/2008 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.