My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 081308
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
PC 081308
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 4:37:57 PM
Creation date
9/17/2009 10:51:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
8/13/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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
City’s greenpoints, 50, staff is asking for 100pts. Think is ok, talked to owner, <br />willing to commit to 100 points, <br /> <br />4.limitations, #22, on open space. It is extremely limited, specifically says , if <br />not listed, cannot do it. If not cattle sheep or goat, prohibited. There are <br />any number of agricultural activities appropriate in non agriculture. <br />Suggest, minor mod. Just be more general description. Agriculture and <br />grazing activities. If not comfortable with that, conceive that open space, <br />agriculture and grazing, subject to city’s use permit process, much like <br />conditional use permit, allow it or not allow it, but see what proposal is. <br />During workshop, Yee asked for significant vineyard activities on lot 4. Lot <br />of discussion, remove that from application and deal in future time. But <br />came out in SR as if not specifically listed, prohibited, more flexibility. <br />Come back and propose other kinds of uses. Lot 4 is lots talked about, <br />biggest lot, there are others who might want to do…eg horse, on stable. <br />Can come back and say can I do it without modification. <br /> <br />Chair Blank asked Mr. Inderbitzen if he was amenable to returning for a Conditional <br />Use Permit (CUP) rather than a PUD modification. Mr. Inderbitzen said yes, as a <br />CUP was a more expeditious process and not as restrictive as a PUD modification. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson asked Mr. Inderbitzen about activities in the open space, and <br />Mr. Inderbitzen replied that they would like to include non-habitable accessory <br />structures that could be used for the care of sheep or horses. Chair Blank asked <br />Mr. Inderbitzen if he was willing to return to the Commission for approval of the <br />design of the accessory structure, and Mr. Inderbitzen said yes. <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br /> <br />Olson – last point about activities in open space, is that #20? <br /> <br />Inderbitzen - #22. <br /> <br />Inderbitzen – would like to include accessory structure, not habitable, but eg shed for <br />sheep, ability to take care of them, without having them in devt in … <br /> <br />Blank – come back? ok <br /> <br />Inderbitzen – ok – color, fence… <br /> <br />Chair Blank disclosed that he has known Mr. Chuck Lemoine for several years and <br />that he talked to Mr. Lemoine at the beginning of the meeting but did not discuss the <br />subject at hand. <br /> <br />ChuckMr. Lemoine stated that he has been Dr. Yee’s neighbor for 32 years and that <br />they have been great neighbors. He expressed his support for the project. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 13, 2008 Page 13 of 26 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.