My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
13
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2013
>
121713
>
13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/11/2013 1:21:52 PM
Creation date
12/9/2013 12:47:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
12/17/2013
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
124
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
DRAFT <br /> Mr. Dolan replied that it would make no change to that section. <br /> Chair Pearce clarified that it would make no change and it would still have what is there, <br /> which is, it has to be compatible. <br /> Commissioner Ritter inquired if this would mean having the Cunningham thing happen <br /> again. <br /> Chair Pearce said yes. <br /> Commissioner Ritter inquired if the FAR for the other residences in different areas in <br /> Pleasanton is 40 percent. <br /> Mr. Dolan replied that was correct. <br /> Chair Pearce clarified that the Commission is not talking about taking the current language <br /> and making it looser. She noted that that was not the Commission's direction from Council <br /> so the Commission would not be taking out the compatibility with regard to the mass and <br /> the scale that would still be in place because the Council's direction was not to loosen the <br /> language with regard to Downtown. She stated that it was her understanding that the <br /> concern was that the some of the Commissioners did not want the extra FAR calculations <br /> in there, and to just leave it as compatible in mass and scale. <br /> Commissioner Posson said yes, to leave it more subjective and less definitive. <br /> Chair Pearce asked Commissioner Posson if he would you like to make that motion. <br /> Commissioner Posson said yes. He indicated that he can support it with the exclusion of <br /> the 25-percent numeric the FAR. <br /> Chair Pearce asked Commissioner Ritter if he is seconding that motion. <br /> Commissioner Ritter replied that he would, noting that the City Council will also be <br /> reviewing this. <br /> Commissioner Posson moved to find that the proposed amendments to the <br /> General Plan, Downtown Specific Plan, Downtown Design Guidelines, and <br /> Municipal Code are statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality <br /> Act (CEQA); to recommend to the City Council to accept the Pleasanton <br /> Downtown Historic Context Statement; and to recommend approval to the City <br /> Council of: (1) Case P13-2447 amending the General Plan as shown in Exhibit D <br /> of the staff report; (2) Case P13-2446 amending the Downtown Specific Plan as <br /> shown in Exhibit A of the staff report; (3) the amendments to the Downtown <br /> Design Guidelines as shown in Exhibit B of the staff report; and <br /> (4) Case P13-2448 amending the Pleasanton Municipal Code as shown in <br /> DRAFT EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, 11/13/2013 Page 27 of 28 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.