My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 09/16/81
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1981
>
PC 09/16/81
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/16/2017 4:16:22 PM
Creation date
4/30/2007 9:08:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
9/16/1981
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 09/16/81
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
ROLL CALL VOTE <br />Ayes: Commissioners Doherty, Jamieson, Lindsey and Chairperson Getty <br />Noes: None <br />Absent: Commissioner Wilson <br />Resolution No. 2060 was then entered and adopted recommending PUD-Industrial <br />zoning for case RZ-81-10 per the staff report of 9/16/81. <br />RZ-81-15, City of Pleasanton <br />Application of the City of Pleasanton to prezone (Annexation No. 87) an <br />approximately 57 acre site located on the east side of Oakland Avenue <br />bounded by Trenery Road on the north and Mohr Avenue on the south to any <br />zoning district consistent with the General Plan. A negative declaration <br />of environmental impacts was also considered. <br />Mr. Harris explained the staff report. <br />Commissioner Doherty indicated he thought the property in question was <br />for Low Density Residential. Mr. Harris indicated that the City <br />Council overruled that recommendation. Commissioner Jamieson wanted to <br />know if there is any commitment implied by the City. Mr. Harris stated <br />that the City no longer has annexation agreements. <br />The public hearing was opened. <br />Art Dunkley, Castlewood Properties, 205 Main Street, represented the <br />property owner, requested that the property be prezoned to PUD-Medium <br />Density Residential. He stated that the land is totally vacant and <br />that the existing surrounding uses might be treated differently than <br />this property. In answer to a question of Commissioner Doherty, <br />Mr. Dunkley stated there are no plans at the present time but he is <br />not sure there would be one-half acre lots next to the industrial <br />facility. <br />Commissioner Lindsey stated he agreed with Commissioner Doherty and is <br />disappointed that the property is not Low Density as recommended by the <br />Planning Commission. <br />The public hearing was closed. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Lindsey, seconded by Commissioner <br />Jamieson that the negative declaration prepared for case RZ-81-15 be <br />recommended for approval inasmuch as the project would have no signi- <br />ficant adverse effect on the environment. <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br />Ayes: Commissioners Doherty, Jamieson, Lindsey and Chairperson Getty <br />Noes: None <br />Absent: Commissioner Wilson <br />Resolution No. 2061 was then entered and adopted recommending approval of <br />the negative declaration prepared for case RZ-81-15. <br />A motion was made by`Commissioner Jamieson, seconded by Commissioner <br />Lindsey, that PUD-Medium Density zoning be recommended for the 57 acre <br />site described in case RZ-81-15. <br />-4- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.