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
indicates how many spaces the agreement relates to and that the agreement shows <br />how the parking need is met for the shopping center. <br />Commissioner Fox questioned if there was any way to attach the agreement as a <br />condition to the condition of approval at a later date. Ms. Seto replied that the <br />agreement typically runs with the land and that as part of the process for the <br />shopping center, everyone in the Center would be notified, and staff would also be <br />aware of it. She added that the condition, as written, addresses the issue that if that <br />parking agreement were to somehow be voided or the agreements between the <br />parties no longer existed, the shopping center that had relied on those off-site <br />parking would be required to come back in and have a discussion about the intensity <br />and hours of its use as well as other things that address any parking demands. <br />Commissioner Narum inquired if Conditions of Approval Nos. 4 and 5 were <br />boiler-plate conditions and requested clarification about the payment of school <br />impact fees as well as connection and water meter fees. <br />Ms. Rondash replied that Condition No. 4 is a standard condition and that Condition <br />No. 5 relates to the use. She explained that a grocery store precludes the use of a <br />retail store and that the applicant is aware of what those exact fees are. <br />Commissioner Narum inquired if there is a no water meter hooked up to that unit in <br />the building. Ms. Rondash replied that there is a water hook up but that the supply is <br />charged at a different rate than the original use. <br />Commissioner Pearce moved to make the required findings and to approve <br />Case PCUP-230 as recommended by staff, subject to the Conditions of <br />Approval listed in Exhibit B of the staff report. <br />Commissioner Narum seconded the motion. <br />ROLL CALL VOTE: <br />AYES: Commissioners Blank, Fox, Narum, O'Connor, and Pearce. <br />NOES: None. <br />ABSTAIN: None. <br />RECUSED: None. <br />ABSENT: Commissioner Olson. <br />Resolution No. PC-2008-45 approving PCUP-230 was entered and adopted, as <br />motioned. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 24, 2008 Page 7 of 41 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.