My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 101806
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
PC 101806
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:27:12 PM
Creation date
7/12/2007 10:04:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/18/2006
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 101806
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
~^ as consistent with the square footages that were the maximum for the FAR variances in <br />the surrounding neighborhood presented by staff in the hearing." <br />The minutes were approved as amended. <br />3. MEETING OPEN FOR ANY MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE TO <br />ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON ANY ITEM WHICH IS <br />NOT ALREADY ON THE AGENDA. <br />Ms. Decker noted that with regard to Item S.a., PMSC-2, Citv of Pleasanton (Pleasanton <br />Memorial Gazdenl, comments had been received from individuals concerning <br />maintenance, landscaping, costs, ground cover, and so forth. She noted that this would <br />be an appropriate time to take public comment on those issues because they are unrelated <br />to the action that the Planning Commission is requested to take on this item, which is a <br />determination of General Plan consistency. <br />Mr. Clark Scott noted that the cemetery may revert to a pioneer-type cemetery, and he <br />did not see why raised headstones could not be used. He was concerned that some plots <br />were marked off with cement mazkers surrounding the plots. He would like the cemetery <br />to remain the way it has been rather than revert to pioneer status. He would like the City <br />to take over the maintenance of the cemetery, whether it remains in its present status or <br />reverts to a pioneer-type cemetery. <br />~ In response to an inquiry by Chair Fox regazding the controlling body of the cemetery, <br />Ms. Decker replied that staff would forward Mr. Scott's comments to the appropriate staff <br />member and then report back with respect to the appropriate individuals or committees. <br />Ms. June Scott inquired whether the City would take over the cemetery. Ms. Decker <br />noted that the proposal to have the City take ownership of the cemetery went before the <br />City Council, which was attached to the staff report. In terms of plans for the <br />maintenance and upkeep, she would determine who the responsible party would be and <br />then report back to the Commission. <br />Ms. Scott expressed strong concern about the maintenance of the cemetery and noted that <br />she and other families of those interred there had to perform the maintenance. She noted <br />that her son was buried there 22 yeazs ago at age 19, and they thought the cemetery <br />would be taken Gaze of. She was very concerned about the appazent lack of progress with <br />respect to the caze of the cemetery. <br />Commissioner Blank noted Ms. Scott's frustration and indicated that this was the first <br />time this item had come before the Planning Commission. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 18, 2006 Page 2 of 22 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.