My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 111010
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2010
>
PC 111010
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 3:14:47 PM
Creation date
4/19/2011 2:58:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
11/10/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
put a very specific condition in the approval. He added that he did not believe the <br />Commission would necessarily find much of a discussion about this in the Minutes. <br />Mr. Dolan advised that staff has not reviewed the modifications proposed by the <br />applicant in the revised plans presented by Mr. Potts. He added, however, that by <br />looking at them, they appear to be responsive to concerns. <br />Commissioner Pentin inquired if Minor Modifications were handled by staff at the <br />department level and if staff can deal with the changes should the Commission approve <br />the application tonight. <br />Mr. Dolan replied that Minor Modifications are handled at the staff level. He added that <br />the differences do not appear to be significant and are also responsive to concerns. <br />Referring to the approvals of the original PUD, Commissioner O’Connor noted that <br />these were approved over seven years ago be a totally different Council and Planning <br />Commission. He stated that he does not think the side windows are intrusive at all, but <br />he agreed with Commissioner Blank that the Minutes need to be reviewed. He <br />indicated that he has a difficult time envisioning what the Park District’s concerns could <br />be and that he does not have a problem with the rear dormers coming back. <br />Chair Olson and Commissioner Narum agreed with Commissioner O’Connor’s <br />comments. <br />Commissioner O’Connor suggested that the applicant apply for the PUD modification <br />after the Commission adjourns. <br />Commissioner Blank agreed and asked to keep that separate to avoid the situation <br />where the Commission goes for the PUD modification and then discovers some <br />surprise. <br />Mr. Potts stated that they heard that the application might have to go before the City <br />Council and would be drawn out. He indicated that they prefer to proceed at this time <br />without the windows. <br />Commissioner O’Connor agreed, indicating that the process could take up to three or <br />four months. <br />Chair Olson disclosed that he had a discussion with Mr. Cotton on the telephone for <br />about 20 minutes. <br />Commissioners O’Connor, Narum, and Blank disclosed that they did talk to Mr. Cotton <br />as well. <br />Tim Cotton, applicant, stated that whatever he wanted to say has been vetted tonight. <br />He indicated that he wanted to bring up the issue before accepting the conditions. He <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, November 10, 2010 Page 11 of 13 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.