My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 09/25/96
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
PC 09/25/96
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/10/2017 4:01:29 PM
Creation date
2/23/2005 4:39:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
9/25/1996
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 9/25/96
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 /> <br />. <br /> <br />Commissioner Cooper feels the security arrangements are good, supports more camping facilities in <br />the EBRPD, and feels troublemakers will not go to a campsite knowing there's an on-site caretaker. <br />The conditional use permit means that if there are problems, it can be revoked. He would like to <br />give it a try and see how it goes. He will support the application. <br /> <br />Commissioner McGuirk stated he feels it is a good economic use of a non-usable area during an off- <br />time. He is disappointed in the lack of public input for the neighborhoods. He feels the EBRPD <br />task force was more of an economic task force. Commissioner McGuirk cannot support the <br />application at this time and recommended continuing the application to allow the neighbors time for <br />public input. <br /> <br />Chair Barker also agrees with Commissioner McGuirk. Do we want this in urban Pleasanton? <br />There was a strong effort to keep this area inaccessible. She feels it would be nice to have a <br />neighborhood meeting to review the plan on a local level, not a lask force from the East Bay <br />Regional Park District. Since the District is not in a time crunch, it would be better to delay the <br />project. <br /> <br />Mr. Iserson clarified the City notification process -- there were over 120 people on the mailing list <br />for this project and notices were sent on September 1. Staff reports were faxed on Friday, <br />September 20, which was the same date the Commissioners were sent the staff report. Mr. Iserson <br />also advised Mr. Pickett on three occasions that he was interested in his comments and opinions. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Commissioner Lutz stated that, as conditioned, he feels the project would work. It would be <br />beneficial to have legitimate people in the area -- with more people in the arroyos, the less fun it will <br />be for teenagers to carouse in the arroyo. Further, if there is no time pressure on the Park District, <br />it would be beneficial to have a neighborhood meeting. He supports the project as it is. <br /> <br />Commissioner Dove expressed the concern of the neighbors was due to the lack of notification of <br />the bridge construction and how this will facilitate people crossing the arroyo during the winter. <br /> <br />Commissioner Cooper motioned, seconded by Commissioner Wright, making the conditional <br />use permit findings and approving Case UP-96-52/Z-96-195, subject to the conditions listed in <br />Exhibit B, with the following modification: <br /> <br />Recommend the East Bay Regional Park District meet with the neighbors to discuss and <br />resolve their concerns. <br /> <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br /> <br />AYES: <br />NOES: <br />ABSENT: <br />ABSTAIN: <br /> <br />Commissioners Cooper, Lutz and Wright <br />Commissioner McGuirk and Chair Barker <br />None <br /> <br />None <br /> <br />Page 9 <br /> <br />September 25, 1996 <br /> <br /> <br />Resolution No. PC 96-72 was entered approving Case UP-96-52/Z-96-195, as motioned. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br /> <br />-... <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.