1965 - Laserfiche WebLink

MINUTES of THE MEETING of THE CITY COUNCIL Pleasanton, California February 15, 1965 THE CITY COUNCIL met in adjourned Regular Session at 8 :00 P.M. on the above date with Mayor Long presiding. ROLL CALL by the City Clerk evidenced the following attendance: Councilmen Bubics, Cairo, Harding, McWilliams and Mayor Long were present. Mr. Fales, City Manager, Mr. Struthers, City Attorney, Mr. Campbell, City Engineer and Mrs. Woodward, City Clerk were present. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG was led by Mayor Long. MEETING OPEN FOR ANY MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL. No one addressed the chair. PUBLIC HEARINGS Adoption of the New Pleasanton Area General Plan, being an amendment to the General Flan dated April 25, 1960, and covering an enlarged area, bounded by Interstate Highway 580, the Pleasanton Township Boundary and Isabel Avenue, Vallecitos Road {SR 84), and Pleasanton Ridge• Mayor Long declared the Public Hearing open. Mr. Fales read a letter from Mr. Robert J. Plan Citizens Committee, which recommended General Plan as proposed by Livingston and of the Citizens Committee by accepted with Bauge, chairman of the Pleasanton General to the City Council that the Pleasanton Blayney and reflecting the recommendations no modifications made prior to adoption. Jr., which enclosed a petition signed and Raymond W. Nilson, requesting that Pleasanton General Plan for the Mr. Fales read a letter from Kenneth 0. Volk, by Volk- McLain communities, the Morman Church each of their properties be excluded from the following reasons: The Pleasanton General Plan splits the planning area of Alameda County for the upper Amador Valley. That, as property owners outside the City limits of Pleasanton, equal consider- ation with property owners within the City limits is not given. The Alameda Planning Commission and Valley Community Services District have made recommendations favoring different zoning that is recommended by the Planning Commission of the City of Pleasanton. The assumption of 10 employees per acre in determining the Industrial acres required in the General Plan is twice as much industrial property as recommended by the Urban Land Institution and in doubling the land recommended to provide for a selection results in four times the industrial property required. The City of Pleasanton has recommended residential zoning for all the surroundit properties but no residential zoning for the properties listed on the enclosed petition. The City of Pleasanton has requested the County of Alameda to delay the zoning of the properties of Volk- McLain, the Morman Church and Mr. Robert W. Nilson and at the same time recommended to the County of Alameda that adjoining proper- ties with annexation to the City pending, be zoned residential. That on November 19, 1962, the Pleasanton City Council passed Resolution No. 3336, agreeing not to annex the subject property without prior consent and the inclusion of this property in the General Plan, is in violation of this agree- ment. Mr. Fales asked Mr. Struthers to comment en this letter. Mr. Struthers stated that any action taken will be within the Confines of the law. Mr. Fales read the report of the Planning Commission, dated February 11, 1965 which submitted additional information in the matter of the new Pleasanton Area General Plan for the City Councils consideration. Mr. Fales suggested that the following items outlined in the report be reviewed and discussed. individually. Residential Areas Mr. Fales reported that no additional items of information were submitted.