My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 102407
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
PC 102407
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:32:50 PM
Creation date
10/7/2008 11:06:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/24/2007
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 10242007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
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
- A recess was called at 8:52 p.m. <br />Chairperson Fox reconvened the meeting at 9:03 p.m. <br />Commissioner Olson indicated that he would like to withdraw his second with respect to <br />PCUP-196. <br />Commissioner Blank noted a point of order and indicated that perhaps Commissioner <br />Olson wished to reconsider his second. <br />Commissioner Olson moved to reconsider his second on the motion for PCUP-196. <br />Commissioner Narum seconded the motion. <br />ROLL CALL VOTE: <br />AYES: Commissioners Fox, Narum, and Olson. <br />NOES: Commissioners Blank and Pearce. <br />ABSTAIN: None. <br />RECUSED: None. <br />ABSENT: None. <br />The motion passed. <br />In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Fox regarding further proceedings, <br />Ms. Han•yman noted that the decision could hear the meeting at this time or continue the <br />item. <br />Commissioner Blank inquired whether the applicant needed to wait until the appeal <br />period was over. Ms. Harryman replied that because the motion was reconsidered, it was <br />no longer in existence, and that the timeline no longer applied. <br />Commissioner Olson noted that he reconsidered his motion because the requirement to <br />flip the floor plan seemed unacceptable to him, and he could not support that part of the <br />motion. He wanted an alternative solution to the safety concerns that did not require <br />flipping the floor plan. He did not want the Planning Commission to micromanage the <br />applicants' business. <br />Commissioner Narum moved to continue PCUP-196 to the next meeting in order to <br />allow the applicants to work with staff to address the safety concerns. <br />Commissioner Blank seconded the motion. <br />Ms. Decker cautioned that staff would not recommend valet service to pick up the <br />children because that would require parents to relinquish their children to a stranger on <br />the streetside. She did not anticipate that many parents would be willing to follow that <br />requirement. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 24, 2007 Page 16 of 40 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.