Laserfiche WebLink
4y$~s"N~°~ CITY of PLEAS~NT~-N <br />~~, . <br />`'~~~° Planning Commission <br />~ M ^9 <br />MINUTES ~OF REGULAR MEETING. <br />Otte : January 14, 1976 <br />Time : 8:22 P.r~. <br />PIaCB; Pleasanton Justice Court <br />review the parking situation in the <br />area again and that staff take a <br />survey of the number of cars and <br />duration of time they are parking on <br />Vervais. <br />The Commissioners feared that by <br />closing off one-third of the street <br />to parking, they might inadvertently <br />worsen the parking problems for the <br />existing residents. <br />On the question of pedestrian access <br />Commissioner Shepherd felt it would <br />cause problems. Commissioner Doherty <br />wondered about clarifying the word <br />"solid" fence, and does it preclude <br />the addition of a gate to the fence. <br />Commissioner Shepherd could see a <br />gate in the fence providing access <br />is permitted only for maintenance <br />of landscaping, then locked. <br />A motion was offered by Commissioner <br />Carrigan, seconded by Commissioner <br />Shepherd, and unanimously carried, <br />stating that although conflicting <br />interpretations can be made between <br />Condition No. 5 of Resolution No. <br />1350 and Condition No. 3 of Reso- <br />lution No. 1351, the Commissioners <br />emphasized that their intent was that <br />the developer erect fencing which <br />would completely screen activities <br />from Vervais Avenue. <br />A second motion was then offered <br />by Commissioner Butler, seconded by <br />Commissioner Doherty indicating that <br />pedestrian access from Vervais be <br />allowed to the property. This <br />motion received two abstentions, two <br />noes and one yes, and did not pass. <br />-4- <br />