Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />11/9/83 <br />Page 18 <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br />AYES: Commissioners Doherty, Getty, Lindsey, and Wilson <br />NOES: Chairman Jamieson <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br />Resolution No. 2390 was entered and adopted recommending approval of case GP-83-15 as <br />motioned.. <br />GP-83-5, Joe Burkhardt <br />Application of Joe Burkhardt to amend the general plan land use designation on approximately <br />22 acres located at the northwest corner of I-680 and Stoneridge Drive from "High Density <br />Residential and Open Space" (Parks and Recreation) to "Commercial and Offices/Community <br />Facilities" (Public and Institutional). Zoning for the property is PUD (Planned Unit Development)- <br />Commercial and Offices/High Density Residential District. A negative declaration of environmental <br />impacts will also be considered. <br />This matter was continued indefinitely <br />PUD-83-21, Vorelco/Dividend <br />Application of Vorelco of California, Inc. and Dividend Development Corporation for PUD <br />(Planned Unit Development) development plan approval for an approximately 70,000 sq. <br />ft. mini-storage facility on an approximately 2.5 acre site located at the southeast corner <br />of Stoneridge Drive and I-680. Zoning for the property is PUD (Planned Unit Development)-General <br />and Limited INdustrial District. A negative declaration of environmental impacts will also <br />be considered. <br />This matter was continued to November 28, 1983. <br />GP 83-10, City of Pleasanton <br />Application of the City of Pleasanton to amend the Safety Element of the general plan with <br />regard to smoke, glare, lighting, electrical interference and other navigation hazards in <br />flight zones near local aviation facilities. The Planning Commission may recommend any <br />action on this matter deemed in the public interest. A negative declaration of environmental <br />impacts will also be considered. <br />Mr. Harris explained the staff report and reason for the application. <br />Chairman Jamieson felt it was ironic that the City's General Plan was not in conformance <br />with the ALUC When for the last two-three weeks airplanes have been flying at a low altitude <br />over eastern Pleasanton heading to San Jose. He took issue with Item 8, Noise Impacts <br />of the Negative Declaration prepared for case GP-83-10. <br />Commissioner Wilson asked if anyone on the City Council serves on the Airport Commission. <br />Mr. Harris said he does not recall who sits on this Commission. Commissioner Doherty said <br />that at one time a Pleasanton Planning Commissioner sat on the Airport Commission. Mr. <br />Harris said that Livermore has an Airport Commission and that group is different than the <br />Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission. He stated this Commission is established <br />by State statute. Mr. Warnick indicated that this Commission has jurisdiction over all of <br />the airports in the area. Mr. Harris stated that every County has the same setup. <br />Commissionerpoherty spoke to proposed Policy Statement No. 1, "Will set up no navigational <br />hazards within the general referral area due to electrical interference." <br />-18- <br />