Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTE S <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />Pleasanton, California <br />Multi-Purpose Room - Valley View School <br />480 Adams Court <br />November 13, 1968 <br />The regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman <br />Antonini at 8:00 PM. <br />1. ROLL CALL <br />PRESENT Commissioner Arnold <br />Commissioner Garrigan <br />Commissioner Gibbs <br />Chairman Antonini <br />Secretary Castro <br />ABSENT Commissioner Plato <br />2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES <br />Upon motion of Commissioner Arnold, seconded by Commissioner Garrigan, and carried, <br />the minutes of the meeting of October 23, 1968, were approved as submitted. <br />4. REVISIONS AND OMISSIONS TO THE AGENDA <br />9a. Tentative Tract Map 43062, Pleasanton Valley. <br />5. OLD BUSINESS <br />a. RZ-68-9, Dorothv N. Johnson <br />Application of Dorothy N. Johnson to rezone that property as described in Map Book <br />946, Block 2528, a portion of Parcel 6 containing 4.01 acres commonly known as <br />3574 Vineyard Avenue from a R-1 (Single Family) District to a RM- (Multiple Family) <br />District (Public Hearing continued from October 23, 1968). <br />The Chairman, Mr. Antonini, opened the Public Hearing. The Planning Director <br />stated that the Commissioners had a copy of the latest petition that had been <br />received by the Planning staff. Basically, the application is unchanged, and the <br />Planning staff still recommends denial. <br />Mr. Ed Wendschlag, representing Mrs. Johnson, was present and stated that on the new <br />submittal, there will be a driveway entrance to the proposed church site from <br />Pico Avenue, which would help the traffic circulation in the area. Mrs. Vesta <br />Fish, of Town Realty, 320 Main Street, seller of the parcel facing on Pico Avenue, <br />was also present and explained that there would be a widening of the street in that <br />area. She went on to say that she felt it would be a rare opportunity to have a <br />convalescent hospital in the immediate area. Only four homes actually back onto <br />the convalescent home with at least 65-80 ft. from the applicant's property to the <br />single-family homes backing onto it. <br />Objections were raised by: <br />Mr. James Wanberg, 491 Ewing. Occupation: Builder. <br />Could not come up with any legitimate reasons why <br />he did not like the convalescent hospital idea, <br />other than he just didn't like it close to his <br />expensive home and his constructing of other <br />expensive homes in the area. <br />Mrs. Vickair, 464 Ewing. This lady felt that the <br />hospital idea is good, but that another area that <br />perhaps did not have such close proximity to single- <br />family dwellings might perhaps be more desirable. <br />- 1 - <br />