My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 04/22/70
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1970-1979
>
1970
>
PC 04/22/70
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/19/2017 10:49:10 AM
Creation date
5/2/2007 8:41:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/22/1970
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 04/22/70
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
4y$~s"N~°y CITY of PLEASANTON <br />~~; <br />.«.:o~-~ Planning Commission <br />MINUTES ~OF REGULAR MEETING. <br />DGte : April 22, 1970 <br />Time : 8:15 PM <br />PIQCe; Pleasanton Justice Court <br />MATTERS FOR Review of conditions of approval for car <br />COMMISSION'S REVIEW wash at 4257 Vervais Avenue - the staff <br />reported to the Commission that the condi- <br />tions for this approval are not in violation <br />However, there have been complaints regardin <br />disposal of garbage, and a problem with the <br />sludge being discharged into the planter are <br />The Planning Director advised that this <br />situation will be checked out and reported <br />back to the Commission on May 13, 1970. <br />Sec. 2.103, Zoning Ordinance No. 520 - The <br />Planning Director presented some snapshots <br />to illustrate the problem of fencing being <br />located closer than 10 ft. on the street <br />side of corner lots in some of the newer <br />developments. Mr. Castro felt that this was <br />not the intent of the Commission, who <br />concurred. <br />Mr. Castro advised that this matter would be <br />set for public hearing and discussed on <br />May 13, 1970. <br />TENTATIVE SUB- MS-70-4, Ralph P. Juhl - The Planning <br />DIVISION MAPS Director stated that he believed that the <br />approval given should be reviewed by both <br />the Planning Commission and the City Counci <br />At the time of Council review, Mr. Castro <br />felt that the original site plan should als <br />be included for comparison purposes, since <br />there was considerable discussion at Counci <br />level at the time of the original rezoning <br />approval. <br />The Commission had no objections to this. <br />Commissioner Antonini expressed his thoughts <br />regarding a review of medical center stand- <br />ards, feeling that this subject required <br />restudy at this time. <br />- 3 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.