PC 082207 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner O’Connor noted that the second and third sentences of the last paragraph on page 20 be modified to read as follows: “He believed the 80-foot setback from the neighborshood would be reasonable and that there appeared to be more room to move the building further, and would thereby allowing landscaping and screening. He suggested adding more screening between the proposed building and the housing development parking lot….” Commissioner Blank noted that his statement in the second to the last sentence of the last paragraph on page 19 that he believed the gate and the fence should look like Pleasanton referred specifically to the gate, which, he believed appeared very baroque and ornate. With respect to the August 8, 2007 work session for PREV-663, M.T.O. Shahmaghsoudi, Chairperson Fox noted that she understands that it is the practice to include in the Minutes the addresses of the speakers. But one of the unique things that happened with last week’s hearing was that there was a radio show in San Francisco, and according to some of the newspaper articles, some advertisers had pulled out of this particular radio show in general, because it appeared the person who moderates this radio show sometimes advocates violence against different religions. She requested staff to consider striking out the addresses of the speakers for this item for safety considerations. Ms. Decker noted that the City had the policy of noting for the audience that it was their prerogative to provide addresses or not and that they were fully aware at the beginning of the hearing that that was their choice and that addresses that were given would be included in the Minutes. Chairperson Fox noted that the first sentence of the fourth paragraph on page 18 should be changed to read as follows: “In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Fox regarding whether both sides of the road should be held by would have to be annexed into the City in order for the City to enforce traffic regulations and whether the City or CHP….” Chairperson Fox noted that with respect to her comments in the eighth paragraph of page 22 regarding story poles, she would like to include the reference she made to single-story pole where the height of the dome was at the top of the pole, and with a mark on where the glass dome would start. She did not intend to request numerous story poles to represent the entire building. Chairperson Fox noted that Commissioner Narum’s comments in the fifth paragraph of page 22 regarding story poles indicated that she felt that the story poles for the Alviso Adobe silo had played a part in causing the project to be rejected. Commissioner Olson moved to approve the August 8, 2007 Minutes as amended. Commissioner O’Connor seconded the motion. Commissioner Blank suggested that this motion be tabled in order to give Commissioners Narum and Pearce an opportunity to comment on the Minutes, as long as it did not cause any procedural issues. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 22, 2007 Page 2 of 20