My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
25
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2011
>
081611
>
25
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2011 1:54:51 PM
Creation date
8/10/2011 1:13:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
8/16/2011
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
25
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
133
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
the rules established through the CC&R's are arbitrary and subjective and can be <br /> interpreted a number of different ways. He encouraged the Commission to approve this <br /> request. <br /> Commissioner Blank asked Mr. Hodnefield which buildings he owns. <br /> Mr. Hodnefield replied that he owns five buildings in the Park, one of which he owns <br /> with his children, which is the subject building; the building two doors down which is <br /> occupied by two service-oriented tenants; and the two buildings on the very end. <br /> In response to an earlier question regarding why the applicant came to the Commission, <br /> Mr. Bowers stated that they originally tried to work with the Association, and all the <br /> objections given involved child safety issues with roll up doors and truck doors. He <br /> indicated that he tried to explain how their building is different, but it did not go <br /> anywhere, and they that there was no other place to go to get the issue resolved so <br /> they decided to take it to the Commission. He noted that they understand the concerns <br /> about safety, but their office building is entirely different because it does not have roll-up <br /> doors or truck doors, and no heavy equipment travel in that area. He added that the <br /> Board can discuss modifying the CC&Rs to remove child-based businesses, but it is a <br /> light industrial park and has office buildings, and he would like to put office uses there, <br /> which is the type of uses that fits in. He noted that removing this type of use would take <br /> away potential tenants that they can have in their building. He reiterated that they can <br /> understand the safety concerns for multi-tenant industrial buildings, but they believe <br /> these uses are a good fit for an office building. <br /> Commissioner Blank clarified with Mr. Bowers that he came to the Commission because <br /> they were not making any progress with the Association regarding their application. <br /> Mr. Bowers said yes. He noted that they felt they could not have a reasonable <br /> discussion with the Association, and they just wanted to proceed with the process and <br /> keep it moving. He added that however this works out, they would then get back with <br /> the Association. <br /> Commissioner Blank asked Mr. Bowers how the City's approval would help with this. <br /> Mr. Bowers replied that if they get approval from the City, they will open the business. <br /> THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br /> Commissioner Blank recalled that a few years ago, as a result of a series of over-the- <br /> counter approvals where a homeowners association was not consulted, staff was going <br /> to add a checkbox on its application form asking if there was a homeowners <br /> association, and if there was one, the applicants would be asked if they have the <br /> approval of the association. <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JUNE 8, 2011 Page 9 of 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.