My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 02/10/82
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1982
>
PC 02/10/82
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/16/2017 4:27:49 PM
Creation date
4/30/2007 2:26:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/10/1982
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 02/10/82
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
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />Pleasanton, California <br />Alameda County Fairgrounds <br />Cafeteria <br />Pleasanton, California <br />Wednesday, February 10, 1982 <br />8:OOpm <br />CALL TO ORDER <br />The meeting was called to order at 8:OOpm by Chairperson Joyce Getty. <br />ROLL CALL <br />Commissioners Present: Gregg Doherty, Bill Jamieson, Larry Lindsey, <br />DeWitt Wilson and Joyce Getty, Chairperson <br />Commissioners Absent: None <br />Staff Members Present: Robert J. Harris, Director of Planning & <br />Community Development; Robert L. Warnick, <br />Director of Public Works & Utilities; <br />Brian W. Swift, Assistant City Attorney; and <br />Shirley McDougall, Recording Secretary <br />Council Members Present: Karin Mohr <br />The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was recited. <br />APPROVAL OF MINUTES <br />The Minutes of the January 13, 1982 Planning Commission meeting <br />were approved as submitted. <br />MEETING OPEN FOR ANY MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING <br />COMMISSION <br />Ron Archer, Civil Engineer and resident of Greenwood Road, Pleasanton, <br />spoke stating he was very disappointed with the City Council's <br />imposition of additional conditions regarding the Orloff development <br />inasmuch as they will cause additional costs to the developer who <br />must ultimately pass them on to the consumers and tenants. In his <br />opinion Greenwood Road is designed for a heavy traffic level as <br />well as Alameda Street. He indicated further that adding more <br />conditions to the project will discourage future development and <br />increase costs to a prohibitive amount with particular concern for <br />senior citizens on a fixed income and young persons just starting out <br />on their own. He urged the Commission and others to think of these <br />things when considering projects. Commissioner Wilson responded <br />that the Planning Commission voted 4-1 to approve the project and <br />he had suggested Alameda Street be used. He further said he was <br />surprised that the applicant didn't rebut the additional conditions <br />imposed on the project. <br />-1- <br />..... ...,. _....1___.... ... ,. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.