My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 03/26/97
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1997
>
PC 03/26/97
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/16/2017 3:57:01 PM
Creation date
1/26/2005 4:07:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
3/26/1997
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 3/26/97
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
<br />Discussion on the motion: <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />Commissioner Wright agreed with the motion, further agreeing that the Planning Commission <br />resolution was a bit ambiguous. However, he feels that if in doubt, the City Council could have <br />asked for further specifics from the Planning Commission. <br /> <br />Commissioner Lutz inquired if all Commissions were going to start sharing their minutes. In <br />discussion, the Commissioners agreed that the intent was that if a Commission felt strongly enough <br />to pass a resolution, it should be forwarded on to the next governing body in its entirety. <br />Commissioner Lutz feels the Commission generating the resolution should direct where they want <br />the resolution to be sent. All Commissioners agreed. <br /> <br />In clarification, Mr. Iserson stated he was unaware there was a resolution from the Affordable <br />Housing Commission to be passed on to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Cooper will <br />advise the Affordable Housing Commission that they need to make Mr. Iserson aware of future <br />resolutions. <br /> <br />Commissioner Cooper amended his motion as follows: <br /> <br />Commissioner Cooper motioned, seconded by Chair Barker, that all City Commission <br />resolutions should be circulated to all appropriate Commissions and the City Council, as <br />directed by the issuing Commission, without censorship. <br /> <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br /> <br />AYES: <br />NOES: <br />ABSENT: <br />ABSTAIN: <br /> <br />Commissioners Cooper, Dove, Lutz, Wright and Chair Barker <br />None <br />None <br />None <br /> <br />The motion carried. <br /> <br />On other issues of Growth Management, Chair Barker inquired if the Planning Commission wants <br />to become more involved in the growth management issue and/or work with the developer committee <br />tasked with growth management issues. <br /> <br />Commissioner Cooper stated that in order to avoid a "stampede" of ill-conceived projects, a sketch <br />should be done now to map out how the City is going to reach buildout, including the number of low <br />income housing. <br /> <br />Commissioner Cooper would support a resolution requesting the City Council reduce the current rate <br />of growth in order to achieve a more orderly progression to buildout. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wright does not agree. We went through the General Plan process to put in <br />guidelines in the General Plan. The suggestion of Commissioner Cooper is the same as putting a <br />cap on growth, is, in Commissioner Wright's opinion, the same as altering the General Plan. He <br />further stated that he feels there should be no change to limits or quotas, but there should be a <br /> <br />Page 10 <br /> <br />Marcb 26, 1997 <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.