My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 031407
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
PC 031407
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:29:20 PM
Creation date
8/17/2007 10:10:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
3/14/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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
Chairperson Fox noted that there were many times when the Commission was told that <br />the Code only applied to Downtown. She noted that while she was comfortable with <br />many changes for Downtown, she was concerned that the Commission had not heard <br />from James Paxson regarding how some of the office uses in the Hacienda Business Park <br />may be impacted. She noted that some businesses near tutoring businesses may have <br />toxic materials nearby, such as dentist offices. She inquired whether there may be certain <br />automatic approval in the Downtown district and whether other items for Hacienda <br />Business Park may be tabled until James Paxson has weighed in. <br /> <br />Ms. Harryman noted that much of the City is covered by a PUD and that this ordinance <br />did not apply to PUDs; that was the reason James Paxson did not speak. She noted that <br />this applied to straight-zoned properties. The only way it would apply to a PUD was if <br />the PUD and the PUD plan referred back to the zoning. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank moved to recommend approval of PRZ-37 to the City Council, <br />with the following modifications that: <br />1. this item be publicly noticed at least two weeks prior to the City Council <br />meeting at which it will be presented; <br />2. the number of students that the ordinance applied to be reduced from 25 to <br />20 students or less; <br />3. Section G of the Application for Zoning Approval form be modified to say, <br />“All applicable Federal, State, and local regulations;” and <br />4. this Code be amended to say “The standard City noise regulations would <br />apply.” <br />Commissioner Olson seconded the motion. <br /> <br />Chairperson Fox inquired whether Commissioner Blank would be willing to reduce the <br />number of students to 15. Commissioner Blank replied that he was not willing to do so, <br />and noted that in looking at the chart and the standard deviation, he believed that 20 was <br />a reasonable dividing line. He added that there were no traffic mitigation issues, and he <br />did not believe it would have a significant impact. He wished to keep the process as <br />streamlined as reasonably possible. <br /> <br />Commissioner O’Connor inquired whether any Commissioners had safety concerns with <br />respect to this ordinance. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank noted that he relied on staff’s judgment based on the presentation. <br />He believed that if someone wanted to put a tutoring facility at the very busy corner of <br />Hopyard Road and Owens Drive, staff would make the proper determination whether the <br />site was a safe industry. Ms. Decker confirmed that would be the case. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson noted that the Commission must rely on the judgment of the parents <br />as well. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank agreed with Commissioner Olson’s assessment and believed that <br />parents would approach staff with any unsafe situations. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 14, 2007 Page 17 of 21 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.