Laserfiche WebLink
gy$~sAN~°y CITY of PLEASANTON <br />~~; . <br />,~ <br />~~° Planning Commission <br />+ww so s <br />MINUTES ~OF REGULAR MEETING. <br />~ ate ; March 25, 1970 <br />Time : 8:35 PM <br />PIG Ce: Pleasanton Justice Court <br />Following the last meeting, instruction was <br />given to proceed to review the C-S District <br />and attempt to redefine certain uses which <br />may be more clearly defined and compatible <br />in said district. <br />In addition, a meeting was held between <br />the applicant's representative, Mr. John <br />Corley, the City Attorney and the Planning <br />Director. <br />Certain problems were involved as the full <br />Commission was not present at the meeting; <br />also, a complete study on C-S uses had not <br />yet been conducted. <br />The City Attorney also read a letter receive <br />from Mr. Corley which essentially stated <br />that the applicant agrees not to apply for <br />architectural approval or a building permit <br />for any use until said uses had received <br />.final action from City Council. The City <br />Attorney added that he was satisfied with <br />the intent of the letter. <br />Because this item was a controversial matter, <br />it was felt that the full Commission should <br />consider it. Accordingly, this matter was <br />continued to April 8, 1970. <br />ZONING ORDINANCE Sec. 28.109 (a ), Zoning Ordinance No. 520 - <br />AMENDMENT application of the Planning Commission for <br />Approved, Res. No.998 an amendment to Zoning Ordinance No. 520 for <br />Sec. 28.109 by the addition of sub-section (a <br />- Conditions. <br />The Public Hearing was opened by Acting <br />Chairman Pons. <br />The City Attorney explained to the Commissi <br />the reasons for this amendment. <br />There being no further testimony, the Public <br />Hearing was closed. <br />Resolution: <br />Seconded: <br />Ayes: <br />Noes: <br />Absent: <br />Abstain: <br />x <br />A resolution recommending approval was <br />entered and passed. - 3 - <br />