My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 04/01/96
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
PC 04/01/96
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/6/2013 12:12:45 PM
Creation date
2/23/2005 3:49:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/1/1996
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 4/1/96
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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 /> <br />. . <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />David Glenn, 5650 Foothill Road, stated he feels the Steering Committee fairly summarized <br />the input from all sub-committees and feels citizen input is accurately reflected in the General <br />Plan. He noted that Pleasanton recently ranked in the top ten fastest growing cities in <br />California, and feels the citizens want to slow this growth rate down. <br /> <br />A short break was called, and the meeting reconvened at 9:05 p.m. <br /> <br />No one else wished to make public comment. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING WAS CONTINUED TO APRIL 15. 1996 <br /> <br />Mr. Rasmussen suggested that the Commission begin its discussion on the major areas <br />(Vineyard, South Pleasanton, etc.). Once the general decisions are reached, it could go <br />through each Element of the General Plan. <br /> <br />Chairman Lutz advised he would fIrst like to discuss the General Plan element-by-element. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hovingh advised he would like to see the 1993 slide presentation from staff <br />on the Vineyard corridor alternatives. He also would like to discuss the major study areas <br />first before discussing the General Plan element-by-element. <br /> <br />Commissioner Dove believes they should address the zoning issues first because that flows <br />through the entire General Plan. <br /> <br />Commissioner Barker would like to go element-by-element. <br /> <br />Commissioner McGuirk feels most of the issues raised fall within land uses and would like to <br />start off discussing study areas fIrst. In response to Commissioner McGuirk, Mr. Rasmussen <br />stated that he could keep track of all their recommendations (agreed to by a straw vote) and <br />then incorporate those recommendations in a letter to the City Council. He also noted that <br />the Commission must make formal recommendations on the Final EIR as well as the General <br />Plan Update. <br /> <br />Chairman Lutz noted the Commission had three alternative approaches: fIrst, discuss the <br />Plan element-by-element, then discuss the "hot elements," or discuss the study areas. He <br />would like to either start with the Elements or the hot items. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wright feels the major concerns brought out through the public hearings <br />would be the fIrst items to be discussed by the Commission. <br /> <br />General discussion continued about the Commission starting its discussions at the next <br />meeting (April 15) after closing the public hearing, as well as agendizing General Plan <br />discussions on their regular meeting scheduled for April 24th, <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br /> <br />Page 8 <br /> <br />April 1, 1996 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.