My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 05/27/1992
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
PC 05/27/1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/29/2017 4:25:53 PM
Creation date
5/25/2005 2:48:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
5/27/1992
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 05/27/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
47
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 />chained area could be so that Building 5 could have the flexibility they needed. Ms. David <br />was willing to do this. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wright referred to Condition 10 and noted that sin the situation has existed <br />since 1985, the owner of No-Sweat Salon should have been made ware of the restriction. <br />Ms. David said the owner was made aware of the matter at the be inning of her tenancy. <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br /> <br />Commissioner Mahem suggested that a gate might be installed tha could be locked and that <br />perhaps an entry card could be given to the patrons of No-Sweat alon. She is afraid that if <br />they extend the hours until 9 p.m. that would encourage the Popi unge patrons to use that <br />lot. That was the rationale of using the chain in the first place. S e would also like to see <br />some kind of information presented to tenants before they become nants so they are aware <br />of what the parking situation is and have no cause to come back t the Commission. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued as to whether a gate was feasible or not. <br /> <br /> <br />Commissioner Horan noted for the record that he likes to support e businesses in the center <br />in every way possible, he would personally favor a locked wrough iron gate on Area 4. <br /> <br />Commissioner Maheru said she would like to accommodate Portio io Property because of the <br />economic climate, but also felt they had made a commitment to th neighbors. She could not <br />support removal of the time restrictions. <br /> <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Mahem, seconded by Com 'ssioner McGuirk (I) <br />finding that the modified PUD would remain consistent with the r uired PUD findings as <br />listed in the staff report; (2) recommending approval of Case PU -85-1O-1M subject to the <br />conditions listed in Exhibit B relative to Condition 12 of Ordinanc No. 1227 pertaining to <br />the elimination of the 21,335 sq. ft. limit on high parking demand ses; and (3) <br />recommending denial of the application relative to Condition 10 of Ordinance No. 1227 <br />pertaining to the parking control and time restrictions in the La Pe te Academy parking area, <br />with the following modifications: <br /> <br />o Modify Condition 3 so that the high parking demand users be identified and <br />that prior to tenancy they are subject to a condition use permit that can be <br />administered by staff to review the parking situation; and <br />o Add a condition that would make the gating to area of a more substantial <br />nature in terms of a metal fence or gate that shall be locked at 7:30 p.m. <br /> <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br />AYES: Commissioners Mahem, McGuirk, Wright, and Chai man Hovingh <br />NOES: Commissioner Horan <br />ABSENT: Commissioner Michelotti <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br />Minutes Planning Commission <br />May 27, 1992 <br /> <br />Page 13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.