My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN120198
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1998
>
CCMIN120198
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:27 AM
Creation date
2/3/1999 7:05:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
12/1/1998
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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
with exceptions. He suggested that if Council gives staff that direction, staff would come back <br />at a subsequent meeting with the precise way to achieve this goal. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico asked where under the current zoning ordinance are extrasensory consulting <br />businesses allowed to locate. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said the businesses are allowed to apply for a conditional use permit in the IP <br />and IG zone. The IP uses are also incorporated, by reference, in the Hacienda Business Park, <br />Koll Center, Valley Business Park, the Old Myer Business Park, etc. Most of the business <br />parks allow all of the uses in the IP zoning district by incorporation. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico asked if staff felt this distinction was rational. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said it is a question of characterization. If extra sensory consulting use is <br />characterized as a real estate or insurance office then the appropriate place is to allow it in the <br />same areas where other comparable uses exist. In the City of Pleasanton compatible uses are <br />allowed in the commercial areas and not in the industrial zones. The industrial zones, however, <br />allow office uses. Staff has characterized extrasensory consulting uses as a commercial use <br />similar to a real estate office. By analogy, staff has placed them in the same category as similar <br />type uses. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico understood the use was already characterized differently under the current <br />zoning ordinance. Therefore Council could decide to leave the use as it is currently zoned. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said that is correct. The recommendation from staff, which is based on the <br />characterization that has been placed on this use by court decisions, is to relook at the zoning <br />ordinance. Staff's recommendation is to broaden the classification or change it from industrial <br />to commercial. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver said the only way this use is allowed now is with a conditional use permit. <br />There are areas in the city that this use is welcome with a conditional use permit. He <br />understood requiring a conditional use permit is restrictive. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said an ordinance would best be defended if the conditional use permit <br />provision is removed, except in certain circumstances, and that the zoning districts to allow this <br />be broadened to include other areas other than what is currently under the zoning ordinance. <br />This recommendation is based upon the court cases. Council is free to exercise its discretion <br />in what it thinks is best for the community. He said there might be challenges if the ordinance <br />is too restrictive. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti asked if there was an option to say a certain area is zoned this way and <br /> another area is zoned differently. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 21 12/01/98 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.