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
Commissioner Nagler I think staff has done a terrific job in this process and they have <br /> been remarkably diligent in reaching out to the community and reflecting their input and <br /> that this is a terrific product and that the expertise of the Planning Commission has <br /> helped, and that I think the product is very well supported <br /> Chair Ritter Great The best part about going last is that most things have been <br /> discussed My only question is on page 26, Table 18, parking lots We just have one <br /> under C-C as conditional It sounds like they're excluding pay for parking facilities I just <br /> didn't know if that was an option or if that's something or are we good with that'? <br /> Beaudin So what we're saying here is that paid parking lots are not permitted in most <br /> of these zoning districts, and if you're going to do an off-site paid parking lot, if you're <br /> just going to take a piece of property in a C-C zone, you have to come in and get a CUP <br /> to operate that commercial business, which is essentially a parking structure or parking <br /> lot that takes money for parking spaces <br /> Chair Ritter So we're not excluding anything <br /> Beaudin We're not excluding it in C-C <br /> Chair Ritter Okay <br /> Commissioner Balch I'll make a motion that we find that the proposed amendment to <br /> the Municipal Code is exempt from CEQA and I move that we adopt a resolution <br /> recommending approval of Case P16-1418 with the following amendments which are <br /> For code section 18 124 200 which is the Minor CUP Element, we add Condition H <br /> which says "A Minor PUD process and a Minor CUP process cannot run concurrently " <br /> Staff could modify the language as they see fit, that we modify to say that Downtown <br /> Retail C-C has a footnote added that says that 7,500 feet becomes between permitted <br /> and now conditional, that we adjust the retail number for permitted versus condition <br /> from 60,000 as it is written to 55,000 square feet, and that we modify Section 18 44 030 <br /> which is related to the downtown language with the Downtown Revitalization to leave it <br /> the way it is without the comments or redlines as proposed So we're reverting to the <br /> original text, and that was the Retail Downtown or the item Commissioner Allen brought <br /> up, and, strongly recommends that a legend be added to the top of the Table listing the <br /> zoning districts <br /> Commissioner Nagler Second <br /> Beaudin Do you want to add the 1,000 foot radius if a Minor Use Permit kicks up to the <br /> Planning Commission'? <br /> Commissioner Balch Do you want us to because I would but okay, so amended <br /> Commissioner Nagler Second as amended <br /> EXCERPT DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, December 14, 2016 Page 29 of 30 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.