My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 09/14/88
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1988
>
PC 09/14/88
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2017 11:22:58 AM
Creation date
4/13/2007 2:42:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
9/14/1988
DOCUMENT NAME
PC091488
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
Resolution No. FC-88-97 was entered and adopted approving Case <br />UF'-88-L,:z as motioned. <br />RZ-_98-_1s_City_of_Pleasanton <br />Application of the City of Pleasanton to amend the Municipal <br />Code relating to provisions for secondary dwelling units in <br />residential districts. <br />Application continued to September 28, 1988. <br />NEW_BUSINESS_=_Public_Hearings <br />Rev_iew_of_Redev_eloQment_Plan <br />Review and recommendation to Pleasanton Community Development <br />Agency concerning proposed Redevelopment Plan and Draft <br />Environmental Impact Report. The Redevelopment plan involves <br />X53 million of public improvements within a 395 acre area <br />surrounding Downtown Pleasanton. An Environmental Impact Report <br />will also be considered. <br />Chairman Michelotti abstained from the case because of being a <br />downtown property owner- Commissioner 5erger acted at Chairman. <br />I~'I'Ir. Lee presented the staff report recommending that the <br />Commission adapt the attached resolution recommending approval <br />of the revised Redevelopment Flan tdated September 16, 1988) and <br />making findings that the Redevelopment Flan is consistent with <br />the General Flan. <br />-+9r. Lee discussed with the Commission Permitted Uses on Fage ~ <br />of the Flan. Hee5noshouldhabetspentdeVSta~fefeltii~t wouldnbe <br />specafy where mona <br />best to maintain maximum fle~:ibility in the Flan. <br />The public hearing was opened. <br />Thurman Caudill, a 4b year resident of Pleasanton, was opposed <br />to the Redevelopment Flan. He felt it would be setting up a <br />dictatorship and that people could subsequently be put out of <br />their own homes. He felt that nearby Livermore businessmen were <br />being squeezed out of their establishments because of being part <br />of a Redevelopment Plan. He said that Community Development <br />Agency plans to put in 4G' spaces for parking lots and not tell <br />people about it. He felt that these places should be paid for. <br />He thought that Pleasanton is doing ail right without the plan <br />and was not i n favor of i t . <br />Leo Heckathorn, 4i~2 Stanley Filvd., a resident of 25 years, also <br />opposed the Redevelopment F'Ian and did not think it was wise for <br />Fi easareton tc, !-gave one. He cited a situation i n Livermore where <br />established trees are being cut doain in the downtown area and <br />replaced with potted ones that do not grow well. He requested <br />more information about the what the Redevelopment Plan was all <br />abort . <br />Fage L+ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.