My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 070809
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2009
>
PC 070809
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 4:40:47 PM
Creation date
9/23/2009 9:03:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
7/8/2009
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
Ms. Stern replied that an argument could be made that it was accessory to the main <br />use, but she noted that many places have child care and preschools associated with <br />them. <br />Commissioner O’Connor agreed and inquired if this was considered accessory because <br />it operates only two or three months out of the year. <br />Commissioner Blank stated that he is assuming this would not be imposed on existing <br />operations. <br />Ms. Stern stated that it would if an owner expanded. <br />Mr. Dolan noted that the list of exclusions is different depending upon which option the <br />Commission is looking at. He stated that staff excluded far less for Option B where the <br />City is doing the regulating, as opposed to Option A which pushes everything back to <br />the State, which is more generous in the exemptions. <br />Ms. Stern stated that it sounds like there is more consensus among the Commissioners <br />for Option B than Option A. <br />Chair Pearce confirmed that Option B is her preference and asked for comments from <br />the other Commissioners. <br />Commissioner Pentin stated that he still had concerns with the State exempting or not <br />exempting and puts the City back in Catch 22.He indicated that he likes the idea about <br />the City being able to raise the standards and stated that he supported Option B. <br />Commissioners Blank, Olson, Narum, and O’Connor stated that they were also in favor <br />of Option B. <br />No action was taken. <br />7. MATTERS INITIATED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS <br />No discussion was held or action taken. <br />8. MATTERS FOR COMMISSION'S REVIEW/ACTION <br />a.Future Planning Calendar <br />Commissioner O’Connor inquired if PUD 52, Spotorno Property, was a Greenbriar <br />project. <br />Mr. Dolan replied that it was but that they no longer have the property. He noted that it <br />should be removed from the Calendar. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 8, 2009 Page 14 of 15 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.