|
l
<br />RESOLUT?ON N0. 379
<br />dEsOi. dt rr; ;
<br />?. she 4f.>}~ of Pleasanton Planning Commission hereby
<br />racocnss.;rds that the Alameda Count, i'ianning Commission
<br />act fa~~~orabiy with regard to the request of Geldermarn
<br />Enterprises for rezoning from A-2 (GQnerel Agrirultvrc)
<br />to P.-lrB-4 (one acre minimumj, a parcel of approaisrtely
<br />375 acres located on "Pleasanton Ridge", weal of Foothill
<br />Road.
<br />2. The City of Pleasanton Planning Coanlssion fi:.t3e tJiaE the
<br />propoand development is in general conformity with the
<br />new expanded Ceneral Plan.
<br />3. The City of Pleasanton Planning Conmiasicn requests that
<br />the Tentative Map of the subject property be referred to
<br />this body by the Alameda County Planning Commission at the
<br />appropriate time in order that the Pleesanton Planning
<br />Commission may consider its conformance with the Pleasanton
<br />General Plan.
<br />The next item on the agenda was a discussion of possible C-0 land use on the east
<br />aide of Sunol Blvd. (Wm. Marsh). The.*.~ bei.ng no representative of the applicant
<br />present, it was moved by Commissioner Lo::aro, seconded by Coa~miseioner Antonini, and
<br />carried, that the matt<r be continued to the meeting of February 30, 1965.
<br />Chairman Landon then proceeded to a discussion of. a proposed auto repair, service
<br />and salsa development: Verve is Ave., C-T Diatric;: ~M:. Wallace Webb). Mr. Campbell
<br />read a letter dated January 8, 1965. from Mr. i41111am P. Webb requesting considera-
<br />tion of this matter. Mr. Campbell stated that the present zoning is C-T, and
<br />quoted the types of commercial enterprises permitted therein. Depending on t"txe
<br />definition of "minor repair", the garage would appear to be a permitted use. The
<br />shops may also be a permitted use depending on their exact use. The new proposed
<br />General Plan indicates the subject area as Retail Business and Offices, which would
<br />eliminate the garage but definitely allow. the proposed stores. The proposed Del
<br />Valle Parkway will probably follow Vervain Ave, and Stanley Blvd. will probably
<br />be cul-de-sac at one end or the other. If the uses era allowed, it might be better
<br />to reverse them in order that the stores would eventually `cost on rr,a Del Valle
<br />Parkway rather than the garage. The Commission discussed the advisability of refer-
<br />ring the matter to Livingston and Blayney far recommendation and report. Mr. John
<br />Codd was present in the audience, and submitted slightly revised plane to the Com-
<br />mission. Mr. Feri, who plans to operate the subject shop, was also present in the
<br />audience, and stated that he has spent considerable time attempting to locate
<br />suitable property for his business. Upon recommendation of the staff, the Commis-
<br />sion decided to refer the matter to Livingston and Blayney for report and recommends
<br />lion, and Ca the City Attorney for an opinion as to whether or not the subject
<br />proposed use is alluwable in a C-T District as the Zoning Ordinance now stands.
<br />Chairman. Landon, therefore, declared the matter continued to the meeting of
<br />February 10, 1955, at which tim<_ a report will be presented by the staff.
<br />Mr. Campbell read a commanication to the Planning Commission from the Alameda County
<br />Planning Ccmmiaeion, dated January 7, 1965, referring the following mattes For
<br />comment cr recommendatieni "Albert ll. Ucmini, V-31~+1, adjunC~r.:u:- to sanction use
<br />of a parcel. reduced from the required 10,000 sq•ft. to 6,500 sq.ft. ir. au 'Tc-1-B-2'
<br />District and to use parce3. ,`.or contractor's yard, adjx~cen*_ ea and south of 3F,5
<br />Virginia Way, Pleasanton area." After discussion by the Cc:tmi^.wion, upon motion
<br />of Chairman Landon., ae.^nd:ad by Commissioner. Johnston, the tioli.owing resolution
<br />was adopted by unanimous vote:
<br />RESOLUTION N0, 380
<br />RESOLVED
<br />:he Pleaaant~r_i Manning Commission recouatends Thai: the
<br />Aia:n;~da ~urnty Planning '~ommiasiou deny the .aqu~st of
<br />Alb~xs.i; Ucmini for reduction of a pax~el and to use
<br />::acs,: as a contractor's yard, adjace~.x~. ~; end south of
<br />3F,~ Virginia Way, Pleasanton A.ea, in a ~:-3.•P,-Z District,
<br />for tr:e reseon that the Pleasanton Plac~ning Cumnissi.on
<br />objects to this camme.rcial use in esix:ential area.
<br />
|