PC 02/20/79 - Laserfiche WebLink

Rod Andrade, MacKay and Somps, representing the applicant spoke. He stated they have reviewed the conditions of approval and concur with them except for condition #3 in which they see no merit whatsoever. This condition relates to planting of unpaved area. Mr. Harris concurred that if #33 was a condition, #3 would not be necessary. The public hearing was then closed. The Commission determined that mitigating measures have been taken and Commissioner Doherty made a motion that this project has insignificant environmental impacts due to the mitigating conditions and that a recommendation to Council be made that the EIR be filed and approved. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Leppert. Resolution No. 1715 was then entered and adopted recommending approval of the EIR for PUD-78-5. Roll Call Vote Ayes: Commissioners Doherty, Geppert, Getty, Wilson and Chairman Jamieson Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: None Commissioner Doherty made a motion to recommend approval of PUD-78-5 subject to the conditions of the staff report less condition #3. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Getty. Roll Call Vote Ayes: Commissioners Doherty, Geppert, Getty, Wilson and Chairman Jamieson Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: None Resolution No. 1716 was then entered recommending to Council that this project be approved subject to conditions of the staff report, minus condition #3. RZ-79-1, City Council Application to amend Chapter 2, Title II of the Ordinance Code of the City of Pleasanton by deleting Article 15.5 (H-O, Historical Landmark Overlay District) in its entirety or amending it in any way in con- formance with the General Plan. Because of the lateness of the hour, this case was continued to March 14, 1979. Large Residential Lot Zoning Study Because of the lateness of the hour, 1979. this study was continued to March 14, MATTERS FOR COMMISSIONS REVIEW There were none. -10-