My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 01/10/79
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1970-1979
>
1979
>
PC 01/10/79
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/3/2017 9:26:27 AM
Creation date
4/30/2007 10:51:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
1/10/1979
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 01/10/79
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
quality retention in their neighborhoods; the same as when they bought <br />the homes. He stated the homeowners association pointed out approval <br />of this project violates the CC&Rs. He said that if he lived in the area <br />he wouldn't want strangers in the area and the clients would be strangers <br />even to Mrs. Barnes. Commissioner Leppert stated he just wanted to <br />point out why he wasn't going to vote for this project. Commissioner Joyce <br />Getty agreed in total with Commissioner Geppert's comments. Commissioner <br />Doherty stated that a massage parlor as part of a home occupation just <br />couldn't be allowed. <br />Commissioner Wilson spoke to the CC&Rs and their adoption by the developers <br />and that the homeowners are aware of the restrictions before they buy a <br />home. He stated that if he lived in that area he wouldn't want the CC&Rs <br />violated. <br />Chairman Jamieson indicated that everything had been said. He said a <br />Gimilar_ anolication was received last year for Mirador and it was denied. <br />Resolution No. 1709 was entered and adopted denying Z-78-162, the appli- <br />cation of Mary Barnes. <br />Roll Call Vote <br />Resolution: Commissioner Doherty <br />Seconded: Commissioner Geppert <br />Ayes: Commissioner Doherty, Geppert, <br />Noes: None <br />Absent: None <br />Abstain: None <br />Getty, Wilson and Chairman Jamieson <br />Chairman Jamieson then told the applicant she had fifteen (15) days to <br />appeal this decision to the City Council. <br />Determination of Uses Allowed in Conjunction with a Garden Center <br />Mr. Harris explaa.ned Casa Verde intends to build new quarters for Richert <br />Redwood and in order to justify the increase in lease costs, they want <br />to expand the items they handle and the service they provide. He then <br />made reference to the letter of Thomas Richert explaining what they <br />would like to carry. He stated that the one item "related home owner <br />installed products" leaves the subject wide open. He stated that staff's <br />opinion is that their proposed additional use is currently against the <br />code. He stated Garden Center is defined in the code but it is also <br />part of UP-76-28, item 1 - that the area shown for the storage and sales o~ <br />landscape materials be utilized solely for the materi~.ls which are directly <br />related to landscaping activities and that no materials intended for the <br />construction of dwellings, commercial or industrial structures accessory <br />buildings, swimming pools, screened porches, etc. be stored or sold in <br />this area - that this doesn't conform and that a minor modification of <br />the use permit would be required to accommodate the applicant's request. <br />He stated the staff has no quarrel with his proposal. He stated that if <br />the code is amended, building materials and home improvement stores <br />could be allowed within the I-P District. He further stated that if a <br />demand was found for other types of items and the code was changed, the <br />applicant wouldn't have to come before the Commission each time he wanted <br />to add an item. Alternatives were discussed by the Commissioners. <br />-5- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.