My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
23 ATTACHMENT 2
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2007
>
060507
>
23 ATTACHMENT 2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/1/2007 11:09:10 AM
Creation date
6/1/2007 10:29:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
6/5/2007
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
23 ATTACHMENT 2
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
64
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).
View images
View plain text
Commissioner Roberts suggested that homeowners considering re-roofing be given this <br />information, but did not believe it should be in the General Plan. She believed that Program 3.5 <br />could include the language "if feasible" but that she would prefer that it be deleted. <br />Commissioner Arkin advised that with respect to Policy 3.3, he had not seen solar water heaters <br />in a long time. <br />Commissioner Roberts noted that the City already practiced Policy 4.2. <br />Commissioner Fox noted that in Policy 4.3, the language should read "when feasible and <br />cost-effective." <br />Regarding Policy 7, Commissioner Roberts agreed with staff to make it more flexible for the <br />City and that Policy 7.2 should be stricken. <br />Commissioner Blank suggested that with respect to Policies 7.8 and 7.9, staff provide additional <br />information to the Planning Commission in order to determine whether an action should be <br />required or encouraged. <br />A discussion about the feasibility and/or cost-effectiveness of the use of PV panels ensued. <br />Mr. Baker noted that current PV panel technology was such that they were very light and that <br />any roof that could hold its own weight could support these panels. <br />Regarding Programs 7.8 and 7.9, Commissioner Fox objected to the use of "concept" and would <br />prefer that instead of discussing those details in the General Plan, a more general statement be <br />included. She believed that encouragement was better than a punitive stick. <br />Commissioner Roberts had a problem with the hydrogen refueling stations and noted that the <br />electric vehicle recharging stations were already obsolete. <br />Commissioner Blank believed that this element should be treated with the same seriousness as <br />the other General Plan elements. <br />Chairperson Maas believed that more general language than "hydrogen refueling stations" <br />should be inserted. <br />Commissioner Fox noted that Policy 8.3 discussed developing an ordinance and did not believe <br />the General Plan should include that discussion. <br />Commissioner Arkin inquired about the meaning of Policy 8.1; staff will respond at a later date. <br />Regarding Policy 9, Commissioner Roberts noted that the language "support affordable electric <br />and natural gas rates" was unnecessary and unclear. <br />Commissioner Blank suggested that the City offer reduced permit rates for homes that were net <br />zero energy homes or had cogeneration capabilities. <br />EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, May 25, 2005 Page 4 of 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.