Laserfiche WebLink
4~~,~,sAHToy ~ <br />CITY of PLEASANTON <br />~~~ <br />.~ <br />~~° Planning Commission <br />rN~o ~ <br /> <br />MINUTES ~OF REGULAR MEETING. <br />DCt@ ; December 12, 1972 <br />Time ; 8 ~ 15 P . M. <br />PIOC@; Pleasanton Justice Court <br />!in its entirety to the next regular <br />meeting on January 9, 1973. <br />ZONING ORDINANCE <br />AMENDMENT <br />RZ- - , Re erred <br />back to Council <br />Mr. Pardini wished clarification that <br />the entire matter was to be continued <br />and this was confirmed for him. <br />These motions were adopted to esta- <br />blish intent by the Planning Commis- <br />sion to satisfy the court's request <br />and the City Council's understanding <br />of this proposed rezoning. <br />Application to amend the Ordinance <br />Codes of the City of Pleasanton to <br />delete from the C-N District, banks <br />and savings and loan offices now per- <br />mitted under a conditional use permit <br />and to delete financial institutions, <br />including banks, savings and loan <br />associations, finance companies, <br />credit unions and related services <br />from the Permitted Uses category ~~, <br />within the O (Office) District. I, <br />Discussion ensued among the Commis- <br />sioners regarding the actual intent <br />of the Council in amending their <br />policy statement for financial in- <br />stitutions. <br />Mr. Vic Lund representing the <br />Downtown Development Committee was <br />present and indicated that he had <br />attended the Council meeting and <br />recieved a totally different impres- <br />sion than the revision as expressed <br />in the ordinance amendment. He <br />stated that approximately one-third <br />of the Central Business District <br />consists of Office District, and the <br />passage of this amendment would <br />greatly hamper development of the <br />downtown. <br />Motion <br />Seconded: <br />Ayes <br />Noes: <br />Absent: <br />Abstain: <br />-11- <br />