My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 092408
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
PC 092408
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 4:38:10 PM
Creation date
11/26/2008 1:16:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
9/24/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 092408
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
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
build in the vacant property, they can file for an exception and be have them decide <br />if they want to be within the 300 feet. <br />Chair Blank stated that the Commission must uphold the Municipal Code and this is <br />part of what the Commission will be voting on. He added that he does not believe <br />anyone would be able to get an exception to that. <br />Mr. Reeves showed a picture of the other McDonald's site with the same tower <br />element housing a wireless antenna facility. Chair Blank inquired where this is <br />located, and Ms. Hoshen replied that it is in Moreno Valley east of Riverside. <br />Mr. Reeves stated that it would be the same archway design with a top and would <br />have a low impact visually compared to having another pole up in the air. He <br />presented an aerial view of the poles in the storage facility area; one at 20 feet and <br />the other at 18 feet. <br />Commissioner O'Connor inquired if the poles were located north of the storage units. <br />Mr. Reeves said they were. He noted that these were the alternative they looked at <br />and that they do not provide the coverage needed for capacity issues. <br />Commissioner O'Connor inquired if those were three antenna capacities as opposed <br />to the eight at McDonald's. Mr. Reeves said yes. He explained that the antennas <br />would be staggered so there would be three antennas on top of one other. He <br />added that they would then come back in a year and try to put another wireless site <br />on the other side of the road somewhere in order to cover the capacity and provide <br />coverage on the south side of the road. <br />Chair Blank indicated that he appreciated Mr. Reeves' input. <br />Commissioner O'Connor expressed concern that a developer who comes in and <br />builds out his property would be limited. He added that when a tenant leaves, the <br />property owner will have to deny a tenant who wants to run a daycare or senior <br />center because of the restriction, and the owner will have to live with a vacancy. <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br />ROLL CALL VOTE: <br />AYES: Commissioners Blank, Fox, O'Connor, and Pearce. <br />NOES: Narum. <br />ABSTAIN: None. <br />RECUSED: None. <br />ABSENT: Commissioner Olson. <br />Resolution No. PC-2008-48 upholding the appeal, thereby overturning the <br />Zoning Administrator's decision and denying PDRW-6 was entered and <br />adopted as motioned. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 24, 2008 Page 38 of 41 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.