My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
06 ATTACHMENT 5
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2016
>
092016
>
06 ATTACHMENT 5
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/30/2016 1:07:49 PM
Creation date
9/15/2016 3:40:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
9/20/2016
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
06
Document Relationships
06
(Message)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2016\092016
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
215
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
on Lodge activities so no activities similar to the "Naughty or Nice" event held a few <br />months ago takes place until the matter returns to the Commission. <br />Commissioner Blank inquired whether or not the City could legally do this for an item <br />that has been continued and has not yet been heard. <br />Mr. Dolan replied that the Commission can request but not direct staff to do things. <br />Chair Pearce suggested that staff contact the property owners to obtain their consensus <br />regarding the requests. <br />Commissioner Fox stated that since the project is zoned as a CUP for private, <br />non - commercial lodges and halls, any activity that includes commercial sales of tickets <br />on the Internet would be grounds for revocation. She concluded that it would, therefore, <br />be better for staff to clarify rules that classify businesses as commercial versus non- <br />commercial. <br />Commissioner Blank stated that he did not disagree with Commissioner Fox but that he <br />had a problem with the process, stating that the purpose of the hearing was to consider <br />revoking the CUP. He added that he did not know if the Commission should place a <br />moratorium on the business or otherwise revoke the CUP, as there was supposed to be <br />a hearing tonight. <br />Commissioner Fox agreed with Commissioner Narum's assessment that a noise study <br />is necessary but did not believe a way to test this was by having another event. <br />Commissioner Narum stated that the noise consultant would most likely require another <br />event there to get an accurate reading of the noise and how it bounces around off of the <br />buildings and fences. She noted that she would not want to make a decision based on <br />a simulated noise study. <br />Commissioner Blank inquired if staff contacted the Police Department to determine <br />whether or not complaints had been received. Ms. Decker said yes and added that this <br />information was included in the materials. <br />Commissioner Narum stated that her preference would be for an independent <br />consultant to conduct the noise study, assuming that the Lodge agrees to do this. She <br />noted that the study would affect how the Commission thinks about the north side of the <br />property and what mitigations would be included in the use permit that the Commission <br />finally approves. <br />Commissioner Olson voiced his support for continuance of the item. <br />Chair Pearce stated that the Commission would open the public hearing, receive <br />comments, and continue the item as an open hearing to the next appropriate <br />Commission date. <br />EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 25, 2009 Page 2 of 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.