My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 07/28/82
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1982
>
PC 07/28/82
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/16/2017 4:26:49 PM
Creation date
4/30/2007 2:10:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
7/28/1982
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 07/28/82
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
PUD-82-15, Meyer Properties, Inc. <br />Application of Meyer Properties, Inc. for development plan approval <br />(Phase 2) for the northwestern portion of an approximately 82 acre <br />site including approximately 484,000 sq. ft. of office, research <br />and development, and light industrial uses located at the northwest <br />corner of the intersection of Hopyard Road and Stoneridge Drive. <br />Zoning for the property is PUD (Planned Unit Development)-Industrial/ <br />Commercial and Offices District. <br />Mr. Harris reviewed the staff report recommending approval per the <br />information shown by Mr. Meyer and recommending 9 conditions. He <br />said some of these conditions would pertain to the entire park and <br />not just to the northwestern half of the property. He stated <br />these conditions need to be modified in order for overall conformity. <br />There is no environmental document because the land uses that are <br />being proposed now were dealt with in the original mitigated negative <br />declaration. <br />The public hearing was opened. <br />Bill Turpie, Meyer Properties, 608 Main Street, Pleasanton, stated <br />they had reviewed the staff report and were in agreement with the <br />proposed conditions. <br />Jerry Goudreau, 5451 Corte Paloma, Pleasanton, stated he would <br />like to know the impact on the total industrial growth represented <br />by whether this case is approved or disapproved. He also asked <br />if the 484,000 sq. ft. was in the parcel to be approved or the <br />entire project. Mr. Harris stated this square footage was just <br />the parcel proposed at this time. Mr. Goudreau continued to question <br />Mr. Harris about the number of jobs which would be generated by <br />the proposed parcel. Mr. Harris stated this information was avail- <br />able in the EIR on Hacienda and in the Economic Analysis which was <br />done on Hacienda, but stated he did not have that information with <br />him. Chairperson Lindsey stated all of the information was pro- <br />vided with the EIR. Mr. Goudreau stated he had the EIR but it <br />only provided the totals and he wanted the breakdown by parcels <br />within the other PUDs. <br />Commissioner Getty stated that the usage had also been changed. <br />Mr. Goudreau asked for an explanation. Commissioner Getty inquired <br />as to whether he had read the staff report. Mr. Goudreau stated <br />that he had not. <br />-4- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.