My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 032807
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
PC 032807
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:29:25 PM
Creation date
8/17/2007 10:13:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
3/28/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
ROLL CALL VOTE: <br /> <br />AYES: Commissioners Blank, Fox, Narum, Olson, and Pearce. <br />NOES: None. <br />ABSTAIN: None. <br />RECUSED: None. <br />ABSENT: None. <br /> <br />The motion passed. <br /> <br /> <br />Chairperson Fox requested that the item be re-noticed for April 25, 2007. <br /> <br />Chairperson Fox inquired whether the Commission would be amenable to reopening the <br />Meeting Open to the Public to hear testimony on Item 5.b. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pearce inquired whether public testimony should be opened under <br />Item 5.b. Ms. Decker noted that if the Commission wished to hear public testimony for <br />an item that was being continued, the Commission ought to proceed with the agenda, <br />open the public hearing for that item, take public testimony, and leave the public hearing <br />open until such time that the item returned to the Commission. She noted that the item <br />would still be re-noticed as a courtesy. She noted that this would be the procedure for <br />either Item 5.b. or Item 6.b. She recommended that action be taken for the item <br />remaining on the Consent Calendar and that the Planning Commission continue with the <br />agenda by opening the public hearing for Item 5.b. without having staff present the <br />project. She added that the Commission may wish to reverse the order of Items 6.a. <br />and 6.b. to accommodate public speakers. <br /> <br />Mr. Roush wished to clarify that the public hearing would not be characterized as <br />testimony on the item but as public comment on an item not on the agenda. He noted that <br />Commissioner Blank should leave the dais during any discussion on Oak Grove. He <br />noted that the Commission may wish to have the public comment under Item 3. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson suggested that because there was concern about the amount of <br />material, the staff report be presented and then take public testimony at the next meeting. <br /> <br />Chairperson Fox noted that the staff report could be postponed and the public could speak <br />on the project at this meeting. She noted that public comment should be allowed to be <br />taken under Item 3 instead of opening the public hearing. <br /> <br />Chairperson Fox moved to continue Item 6.b. and re-notice the item for April 25, <br />2007, to have any additional information available to the public within 72 hours, <br />and to allow any member of the public to speak again at the April 25, 2007 meeting. <br />Commissioner Olson seconded the motion. <br /> <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 28, 2007 Page 3 of 16 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.