My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 03/08/78
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1970-1979
>
1978
>
PC 03/08/78
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/3/2017 9:21:13 AM
Creation date
4/30/2007 11:31:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
3/8/1978
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 03/08/78
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
Chairman Butler asked about the status of the McManus property and what <br />arrangements, if any, have been made regarding acquisition of those lands. <br />He wondered if it was premature at this time to look at this revision. Mr. <br />Dutchover replied that the staff feels it is appropriate to master plan <br />what we now own. <br />Commissioner Wood wished to verify that no lighting plan would be so de- <br />signed as to cast a glare on the adjacent residences. Mr. Dutchover <br />answered that this can be taken care of, with the aid of buffer zones. <br />Commissioner Shepherd asked what plans are being made for safe pedestrian <br />crossing on Hopyard Road. Mr. Dutchover stated that during Little League <br />season, there will be a crossing guard posted there. If this revised master <br />plan is developed, he envisioned some traffic signalization at that spot. <br />Commissioner Jamieson asked whether approval of this revised plan would <br />mean giving the "go ahead" for implementation of the plan. Mr. Dutchover <br />indicated that the City has $118,000 and would begin development of the <br />next phase. <br />Commissioner Jamieson asked how acquisition, if any, of some of the McManus <br />property would affect this plan and Mr. Dutchover answered that the City <br />would immediately apply to the State to use the funds but would redesign <br />the park. He stipulated that the funds would not be available until July, <br />1978, at which time the matter of the McManus property should have been <br />resolved. <br />Mr. Dutchover told the Commission that no detailed plans would be drawn <br />at this time. <br />Commissioner Shepherd noted that for the most part, the revised plan and the <br />old one are virtually the same as far as the present development phase is <br />concerned. <br />Commissioner Wood commented that the sooner the Youth Sports Park is developed, <br />then the neighborhood parks could revert to their originally intended uses. <br />Resolution No. 1620 was then entered and adopted concurring with the re- <br />visions proposed for the Youth Sports Park as approved by the Park and <br />Recreation Commission under their Resolution 78-1. <br />Roll Call Vote <br />Resolution: Shepherd <br />Seconded: Wood <br />Ayes: Doherty, Jamieson, Shepherd, Wood, Chairman Butler <br />Noes: None <br />Absent: None <br />Abstain: None <br />Review of a <br />tures over 2~; <br />uest to amend the Ordinance Code to allow screeni <br />eet high in residential front setbacks. <br />struc- <br />Secretary Harris explained that this request is a result of a request from <br />Al Arrigoni requesting the review as spelled out in his February 22, 1978, <br />letter. Secretary Harris stated that the staff has looked at this question <br />before, and has real concerns as to how the code can be amended yet still <br />maintain sufficient control. He feared abuses could result. <br />-12- <br />-___..___ ._...______.__._~. _......___,. .._._..~...,-_ .._ ___ ~._._._._...._ m__._.. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.