My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 05/12/1993
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1993
>
PC 05/12/1993
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/2/2017 2:45:04 PM
Creation date
6/2/2005 9:35:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
5/12/1993
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 05/12/1993
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
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 />if the permit could be revoked should it become a nuisance. Mr. S ft affirmed that the <br />conditional use permit could be revoked if necessary. <br /> <br /> <br />Commissioner McGuirk stated that he is trying to get a feel for what types of business fit the <br />downtown "image" and asked if this application appears to be accep ble. Mr. Swift stated <br />that staff feels this will fit very well into the downtown. <br /> <br />Commissioner Finch advised that he remembers the history of that b ilding and stated that <br />much of it is constructed of six-inch thick masonry walls. He did n t think sounds would <br />penetrate through them. <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. <br /> <br />Katherine Ferruci, 163 W. Neal Street, represented the application. he stated she is the <br />mother of three children and is a homeowner in the Tri-Valley. She said she chose <br />downtown Pleasanton as the location for her dance studio because of the charm and history <br />of the area and felt that a ballroom studio would be a nice touch. S e felt that instruction in <br />a non-threatening atmosphere would invite men and women of all ag s to take advantage of <br />the studio. She thought that the studio would also promote local rev nue as people would <br />come for dance lessons and then go to a restaurant or shopping. <br /> <br />Ms. Ferruci stated she has read the staff report and concurs with the conditions of approval. <br />However, she referred to page 2 of the staff report and noted that th last lesson will be <br />given from 9:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. The studio will close at 10:00 .m. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wright asked for clarification of the number of instru tors on site. The <br />applicant said she would be the only full-time instructor with two -time instructors and a <br />receptionist. <br /> <br />Commissioner Michelotti expressed concern about the possibility of nacceptable noise levels <br />of music coming from the studio to the restaurant and stated she has n in a San Francisco <br />restaurant where a disco was allowed underneath. At that place it w difficult to hold a <br />conversation in the restaurant because of that situation. The appli t stated that should not <br />be a problem because the music she will play is not nearly as loud that used for the noise <br />testing. She said the music equipment would be somewhat like a ho e music system. She <br />only has 500 square feet of dance space and the student needs to be ble to hear her <br />instructions so music cannot be played too loudly. <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br />Commissioner Michelotti thought that staff had done a very thoroug analysis of any possible <br />problems in regard to noise and parking. Her concerns have all bee addressed. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes May 12, 1993 <br /> <br />Page 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.