|
1
<br />M I N U Y E S
<br />of
<br />THE MEETING
<br />of
<br />THE PLA?n1I~Iv C0.1MIS$i0"d
<br />Pleasanton, California
<br />April 14, 1965
<br />The regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at
<br />8:00 P.M., on Wednesday, April 14, 1965, by Chairman Landon.
<br />ROLL CALL showed the following:
<br />Present: Commissioners Artonini
<br />Johnston
<br />Lozano
<br />Rego
<br />Chairman Landon
<br />Secretary Falea
<br />Upon motion of Comnieaioner Lozano, seconded by Commissioner Johnston, the minutes
<br />of the meeting of March 24, 1965, were approved as presented by unanimous vote.
<br />Chairman Landon called upon Mr. Falea who introduced the subject of the lack of
<br />control which the Commission has over service station uses in commercial zones.
<br />Following discussion, upon motion of Commi.eaioner Lozano, seconded by Commissioner
<br />Antonini, and carried, the Commission set a public hearing fora special Planning
<br />Commission meeting on Wednesday, May 5, 1965, at 8 P.M., to consider amendments to
<br />Articles 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 of Ordinance No. 309, to restrict or otherwise modify
<br />the location of auto service stations as permitted uses, accessory uses, condi-
<br />tional uses or prohibited uses.
<br />Chairman Landon opened the public hearing on the application of Patsy Fexrulli,
<br />4130 Alvarado St., for a Variance from Section 6.500, Ord. No. 309, in order to
<br />install a patio cover within the rear-yard setback, at the above address in an
<br />R-1 District. Mr. Fexrulli was present in the audien^_e. Mr. Fates, in giving the
<br />staff report, explained that construction cuss commenced on the subject patio
<br />without benefit of a building permit and in violation of the Zoning Ordinance.
<br />The clwner was notified of the requirements and subsequently made application fox
<br />the subject Variance. The applicant proposes 14.1 feet from the covered patio to
<br />the sear lot line, whereas 20 ft, are required. Since similar variances have
<br />been granted in the past, and the fact that detachment from a dwelling changes
<br />the requixementa, the staff feats that as this situation is becoming recurrent,
<br />the related sections of the Zoning Ordinance in particular should be reviewed at
<br />such time as a total revision of the Zoning Ordinance is instituted. It was moved
<br />by Commissioner Antonini, seconded by Commissioner Rega, and carried, that the
<br />public hearing be closed. After discussion by the Commission, upon motion of
<br />Commissioner Antonini, seconded by Commissioner Lozano, the following resolution
<br />was adopted by unanimous vote:
<br />RESOLUTIOSd NO. 413
<br />WHERF,AS, the application of Patsy Fexrulli., 4130 Alvarado St., for a
<br />Variance fsem Section 6.500, Ord. No. 309, in order to install
<br />a patio cover m~ithin the rear-yard setback, at the above address in an
<br />R-1 Diat-rict, has coma before this Comaicsinn;
<br />NOW, TFIEREb'ORE, EE IT
<br />RESOLVED, that the above-named Variance is hereby granted.
<br />Chairman Landon opened tY.e public hearing on the application of Esaenar Investments
<br />of Auburn, 155 Montgomery St., San Francisco, for an amendment to Ord. No. 309,
<br />rezoning approximately 8 acres located at the southwest corner of Valley Avenue
<br />and Santa Rita Road, from the A District to the C-N District. Mr. Falea read the
<br />staff report as contained in a report subr.~ttted by Livingston & Blayney, dated
<br />April 9, 1965, which considered present an~i probable future zoning of the surround-
<br />ing area, itemized recorm:endatione i~rn~e.~te-ationa in site design, and stated
<br />that although a neighborhood shopping`~on ~he subject property would be consistent
<br />with the General Plan, C-N zoning would offer the City inadequate control, whereas
<br />
|