My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
16 ATTACHMENT 06
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2008
>
050608
>
16 ATTACHMENT 06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/1/2008 12:24:28 PM
Creation date
5/1/2008 12:24:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
5/6/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
16 ATTACHMENT 06
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
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
As stated above, allowing children to come and go freely is contradictory to <br />the conditions that the Planning Commission has imposed on similar <br />facilities that require children under the age of 13 to be signed in and out. <br />Even if the child were picked up and "signed in" by Mr. Pfund or his <br />employee/instructor and then picked up and "signed out" by a parent, the <br />waiver nevertheless allows a child to be able to come and go freely. <br />Children that will attend the Academy are very young, even kindergartners, <br />and it is neither logical nor appropriate to allow them to be able to come <br />and go freely or attend a facility that is "not responsible for the supervision <br />and care" of children. Finally, the Academy is proposed in the middle of an <br />industrial park, and not in a residential area. Motorists within the Business <br />Park would not expect to encounter young people which could lead to an <br />injury. For all of these reasons, staff believes this finding cannot be made <br />as the application is currently proposed. <br />3. The proposed conditional use will comply with each of the <br />applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. <br />Given the degree of inconsistency between what was originally submitted <br />(that led to the issuance of the Zoning Certificate, subsequently rescinded) <br />and the information that was later submitted (e.g., multiple revisions of the <br />scope of operations) and given that the applicant did not cease operations <br />as directed by staff by December 31, 2007 (see Exhibit C for Code <br />Enforcement's letter directing that the applicant cease operations as of <br />January 4, 2008), the proposed use is detrimental to the public health, <br />safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in <br />the vicinity. <br />Therefore, staff believes this finding cannot be made. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.