My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 062216
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2016
>
PC 062216
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2017 2:44:44 PM
Creation date
8/11/2017 2:33:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
6/22/2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
56
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
Beaudin: We were just talking about that. So there's a temporary use permit process. It <br />requires some lead time so if you know about the event and went through a regular <br />check and that is still approved by me, but there's an application process and it's <br />considered an event permit. <br />Commissioner Balch: So conceivably, if the Masons wanted to have an event in their <br />backyard which has a prohibition since it's a buffer but its advanced planning and <br />thought of, it could go through a process. I like that. <br />Commissioner Allen: I like that too. <br />Commissioner Nagler: So are we saying that if the Masons want to have a yoga class <br />for themselves and eight people sign up for the yoga class and they would like to have <br />the yoga class in the fresh air in the privacy of the piece of property away from the <br />street in the backyard, in the buffer zone.... <br />Commissioner Balch: They would have to get a temporary use permit. Yes, we are <br />saying that. <br />Commissioner Nagler: For an eight person yoga class? <br />Commissioner Balch: Yes. Because the premise is that it's a landscape area of some <br />sort and frankly, the condition was an accepted condition to build the building. If you <br />didn't like it, don't build the building frankly. That's my opinion. It was a stated condition. <br />This is a buffer zone originally in 1977 and they chose to build it which meant, hey, <br />you're in until you destroy the building in my opinion because you agreed by getting a <br />building permit, pulling it, getting it, finaling it and building the building. <br />Commissioner Nagler: Speaking about things changing, if it turns out by chance escrow <br />closes and there's a new owner and the owner comes to the City and says "we want to <br />tear down the buildings there; that we only did this whole thing because we want the <br />piece of the property ". We're going to tear down the building or double the size of the <br />building and the only way to double the size of the building is to go into this buffer zone, <br />are we in any way suggesting by this action that we're creating some notion that the <br />buffer zone has to be of some distance, some size? <br />Chair Ritter: It all starts over. <br />Commissioner O'Connor: It all starts over. <br />Commissioner Balch: Yes, it all starts over, and frankly, it will depend on the design of <br />that building, concept. <br />Commissioner O'Connor: It's a clean slate. <br />Chair Ritter: It comes to us anyway as a clean slate. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, June 22, 2016 Page 37 of 56 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.