My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 091306
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
PC 091306
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:25:01 PM
Creation date
7/12/2007 9:58:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
9/13/2006
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 091306
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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
<br />Ms. Decker noted that the issue of early start times or extra meetings had been under <br />discussion on several occasions. Thus far, the Planning Commission has not desired an <br />extra meeting but had promoted the idea of starting earlier. Staff had considered that <br />option, and some meetings could be started earlier in order to provide more time to get <br />through agenda items. She noted that it would be up to the Commission and added that <br />the scheduling of items was under the Commission’s purview. She cautioned that an <br />early start time could not become a normal start time as this would be confusing to the <br />residents. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank supported the idea of an earlier start time or an additional meeting <br />day. <br /> <br />Commissioner O’Connor would be supportive of either or both ideas. <br /> <br />Acting Chairperson Fox would support an earlier start time but not an extra Wednesday, <br />which she believed would be confusing to the public. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank did not believe starting at 6:30 p.m. would make a substantive <br />difference and added that the Planning Commission has occasionally scheduled <br />additional meetings with adequate public notice. <br /> <br />Commissioner O’Connor noted that it would be on an exception basis, not a regular basis. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson added that an extra meeting would could address a single issue. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pearce would be in favor of an additional meeting rather than starting <br />early, which would be difficult for working people to attend. <br /> <br />Mr. Iserson noted that the ultimate solution was to streamline the process, which included <br />the addition of a Customer Service/Development Services review committee process. In <br />the meantime, staff has tried to reduce the number of items placed on the Commission <br />agenda. He noted that if a project could be addressed at the staff level, that would save a <br />lot of time without removing discretion from the Commission. The addition of the <br />Consent Calendar has also reduced the number of hearings on the agenda. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank suggested that this item be agendized for further discussion. <br /> <br />8. MATTERS FOR COMMISSION’S REVIEW/ACTION <br /> <br />a. Future Planning Calendar <br /> <br />No discussion was held or action taken. <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 13, 2006 Page 22 of 23 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.