My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 01/25/72
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1970-1979
>
1972
>
PC 01/25/72
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/30/2017 11:46:36 AM
Creation date
4/30/2007 4:29:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
1/25/1972
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 01/25/72
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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
4v$~-3 ANToZ~ <br />CITY of PLEASANTON <br />~ '~~ • <br />,~ <br />~~° Planning Commission <br />MN{D t <br />MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING. <br />DGte : January 25, 1972 <br />Time : 7:00 PM <br />PIG C8: Pleasanton Justice Court <br />of a series of amendments to existing quarry <br />permits to allow Kaiser to fill the pits wit <br />overburden and/or garbage. It would have to <br />be approved by the Planning Commission of <br />Alameda County and by the Board of Superviso <br />After these procedures, a use permit would <br />also have to be granted by Alameda County <br />Planning Commission fora sanitary land fill <br />operation. <br />Mr. Edgar feels the Commission's comments <br />should be directed to the land use of the <br />property, the position of the City to appli- <br />cations of this magnitude and the benefits <br />that would accrue. <br />(What the Commission should consider is some <br />~~,sort of guideline or input in which the City <br />can prepare a policy statement representing <br />fits position on this application. If the <br />.Commission felt this to be a reasonable re- <br />quest, perhaps they should consider the <br />following: <br />There is a land use plan ultimately for this <br />project. Perhaps the Commission should con- <br />sider the land use that is going to exist on <br />the property for the next 80 years. The Cit <br />Manager's feeling is 1) that a project of th' <br />magnitude having this kind of an impact shou <br />be annexed to the City of Pleasanton, in ord <br />that its destiny can be controlled by agenci <br />functioning within the City. 2) If the <br />project is approved, the benefits that would <br />accrue to the City should be precisely spell <br />out. 3) In the area of the water basin, <br />the City should rely greatly on the advice <br />of the technical agencies, but that the <br />City itself should explore the possibility <br />of a method to seal off the pits in order to <br />protect the water basin, and that the leacha s <br />should be pumped out and hauled away. The <br />City should not consider a system in which <br />cover-up of the water basin without sealing <br />the pits completely is allowed. 4) The <br />- 19 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.