Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes <br />Planning Commission <br />12/12/84 <br />RZ-84-18, City of Pleasanton <br />Application of the City of Pleasanton to prezone the five parcels <br />totalling approximately 1.9+ acres located at 3655, 3683 and 3731 <br />Vineyard Avenue to the PUD (Planned Unit Development) Medium <br />Density Residential District or any other zoning district in <br />conformance with the General Plan. A negative declaration of <br />environmental impacts will also be considered. <br />Mr. Harris presented the staff report recommending PUD zoning for <br />the subject property. <br />The public hearing was opened. <br />Mr. Heinrich, 3683 Vineyard Avenue, owner of one of the parcels <br />indicated he would be happy to answer any questions relating to <br />his property. <br />Chuck Muth, 3636 Vine Street, indicated his property abuts the <br />subject property. On four of the five parcels, there currently <br />exists single-family residential units. He requested that there <br />be a delay in the decision of the prezoning until after the <br />Vintage Hills study has been completed which will be in <br />approximately six months. <br />Chairman Doherty asked staff about this situation. Mr. Harris <br />indicated that the same request was made to City Council at the <br />time they considered the request for annexation and they agreed <br />to annex and initiated an application to prezone. <br />Glenn Duren, 3568 Vine, was concerned with possible increased <br />density. He was present when the City Council asked that the <br />entire area be studied. He urged the zoning be continued for <br />the result of the commissioned study. <br />The public hearing was closed. <br />Chairman Doherty asked staff to comment on this application. Mr. <br />Harris indicated that zoning must conform to the General Plan for <br />the area and that for the property to be rezoned low density <br />residential, a general plan change would be needed. Mr. Swift, <br />indicated that the property requires a prezoning for annexation <br />purposes. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Lindsey, seconded by <br />Commissioner Getty that the negative declaration prepared for <br />case RZ-84-18 be recommended for approval inasmuch as prezoning <br />of the subject property would have an insignificant environmental <br />effect on the environment. <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br />AYES: Commissioners Getty, Innes, Lindsey, Wilson and Chairman <br />Doherty <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN:None <br />- 15 - <br />