My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
15
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2017
>
011717
>
15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/11/2017 4:34:02 PM
Creation date
1/11/2017 11:06:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
1/17/2017
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
15
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
184
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
top of your head'? If we were doing a modification to a CUP do we charge the full rate or <br /> isita 7 <br /> Bonn It's usually a new cost We usually do substantial conformance The Director of <br /> Community Development can determine it's in substantial conformance to the CUP The <br /> Director can also discern that it makes certain slight changes to the proposed use or if <br /> the Director deems it's substantial, then it comes to the Planning Commission <br /> Commissioner Brown I meant a new CUP <br /> Beaudin Yes, it's a fee for a CUP If you need it, you pay the fee and you get in line <br /> with the other folks who need to come to hearing <br /> Commissioner Brown Thank you <br /> Chair Ritter Keep going Shweta, you're doing great <br /> Bonn I think we're getting close to the end Right now the Administrative CUP process <br /> is unique to Chapter 9 22 It applies only to recycling facilities These are the mailbox <br /> style, kiosk style enclosures that you may have seen in a lot of parking lots around <br /> town This is really just for simplification purposes Instead of having an Administrative <br /> use permit process on top of a minor CUP on top of the CUP, we're proposing to delete <br /> references in Chapter 9 22 to the Administrative CUP process and we're replacing it <br /> with another very streamlined administrative review that's called a Temporary CUP So <br /> it's strictly just for cleanup and simplicity not to have too many CUP processes outlined <br /> in the code <br /> Commissioner Balch Are we eliminating the CUP process or are we just rebranding the <br /> CUP process? <br /> Beaudin This point is a hard one There's just too many use permit names out there So <br /> the Administrative Use Permit has to do only with recycling facilities in our code right <br /> now and when you start to have a minor use permit and an administrative use permit <br /> and a temporary use permit, there's just too many use permits along with our standard <br /> CUP So what this does is it eliminates Administrative CUPs and rolls those particular <br /> uses into the Temporary CUPs <br /> Commissioner Balch But all the criteria, all the conditions, all the applications are all the <br /> same <br /> Beaudin Same thing, but you do have to come back and ask The temporary use permit <br /> is good for 12 months and so you're coming back and you're re-upping, and those are <br /> the kinds of uses we want to see people re-up on because sometimes they just get left <br /> behind and forgotten about <br /> Commissioner Balch There's just a recycling use permit for the city <br /> Beaudin Yes, it's a marginal it's probably a loss for us by the time we do the <br /> paperwork <br /> EXCERPT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 31, 2016 Page 8 of 25 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.