My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 091008
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
PC 091008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 4:38:03 PM
Creation date
11/26/2008 1:14:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
9/10/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 091008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
something where the applicant could make a proposal, and if the appellants agree to <br />it, the Commission could authorize him to approve it; and if the parties do not reach <br />an agreement, staff will return to the Commission with alternatives. <br />Commissioner Fox stated that she likes the first alternative, but not the second one <br />because she still believes what the City Council years ago indicated that it wanted to <br />see re-grading requests. <br />Chair Blank stated that if the Commission tables this to the next meeting, and staff <br />gets both parties to agree between now and the next meeting, the Commission can <br />then send this to the City Council, explain what was said in 1988, and indicate that <br />the two parties are 100 percent in agreement. He stated that he would be <br />astonished if the City Council said it would not let the agreed-upon proposal move <br />forward. He added that if, on the other hand, there is no agreement reached, then <br />the Commission can have more detail from staff in terms of what that setback should <br />be for the above-ground restriction, and the Commission can then move forward <br />from there. <br />Commissioner Fox requested that the item be addressed at the next meeting as the <br />appellants have gone through a lot and that she would not want to have them spend <br />the next 20 hours in meetings. Chair Blank stated that this is something he felt could <br />be done by the next meeting. Mr. Dolan stated that realistically, between now and <br />the next meeting, staff could ask Mr. Jeffrey to make a proposal and present it to the <br />Johnstons, and if the Johnston do not accept the proposal, staff would then go on to <br />the Commission to consider options along the lines of what has been discussed, and <br />it would not be a long, drawn out mediation. Chair Blank confirmed with Mr. Dolan <br />that the setback recommendation could also be included through a short memo to <br />supplement the current staff report. <br />Commissioner Pearce requested Mr. Dolan to measure the height of the wall, and <br />Mr. Dolan replied that could be done if Mr. Jeffrey allows staff to do it. <br />Commissioner Fox reiterated that it should not be allowed to go for not more than <br />two weeks. Mr. Dolan agreed and noted that it would take months if it does end up <br />going to Council. <br />Commissioner Pearce moved to table PAP-123 (PDR-715) to the Planning <br />Commission meeting of September 24, 2008. <br />Commissioner Fox seconded the motion. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 10, 2008 Page 29 of 33 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.