|
<br />Mr. Falea stated the City Council has set a public hearing on the matter of rezon-
<br />ing of the subject tract to R-1 for April 20, 1964. The staff recommends approval
<br />of the subject Zoning Fermit to construct a dwelling group of three model homes,
<br />but no building permits may be issued until after the City Council approves the
<br />zoning. Also, temporary access to the subject model homes from Santa Rita Road
<br />shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of building permits.
<br />After discussion by the Commission, upon motion of Commissioner Rega, seconded by
<br />Commissioner Antonini, the following resolution was adopted by unanimous vote of
<br />those Commissioners present:
<br />RESOLUTION N0. 297
<br />WHEREAS, the application of Devmar, Inc., 268 Grand Avenue, Oakland,
<br />for a Zoning Permit in accordance with Section 17.500, Ordinance
<br />No. 309, in order to construct model homes on Lote No. 183, 184 and 185,
<br />Tract No. 2595, has come before this Commission;
<br />NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
<br />1. The above-named Zoning Permit is hereby granted subject
<br />to the following conditions:
<br />a. No building permits may be issued pending action
<br />by the City Council zoning the area of Tract No.
<br />2595 to R-1.
<br />b. Temporary access to the subject model homes from
<br />Santa Rita Road shall be approved by the City
<br />Engineer prior to the issuance of building permits.
<br />The next item on the agenda was consideration of Tentative Subdivision Map, Tract
<br />No. 2573 (Unit No. 5, Mission Park), which matter was continued from March 25, 1964.
<br />Messrs. Fairfield, Jacobson and Donahue were present in the audience. Mr. Falea
<br />read a letter from Dr. Ray Haskell, Superintendent of the Pleasanton Joint School
<br />District, dated March 26, 1964, stating that the School Distr{Ct has no objection
<br />to the approval of the Tentative Map as presented, and that the Board of Trustees
<br />has authorized appraisal, survey and purchase of the elementary site as described
<br />thereon. Mr. Fales said the staff, therefore, requests that Mr. Fairfield present
<br />td the Commission any drawings he might have, whereupon Mr. Fairfield made a
<br />presentation and answered questions during the discussion which ensued, especially
<br />concerning the matter of a park site. The Commission considered, point for point,
<br />the report on the Tentative Map for Tract No. 2573 from the City Engineer to the
<br />Planning Commission, dated March 25, 1964. Mr. Fales stated that with regard to
<br />the park site the staff is satisfied that the developer has submitted a Preliminary
<br />Map for Tract No. 2574, Mission Park Unit No. 6, immediately north of Tract No.
<br />2573, and indicates upon it a S-acre park site immediately west of the school site
<br />in Tract No. 2573. Mr. Fairfield explained that the park is not 5 flat acres--
<br />probably 3 to 3~ acres are flat; the balance is not too steep for picnic tables,
<br />but too steep for recreation. He also stated a pedestrian access should be pro-
<br />vided by the school to the pask, although it ie not shown on the Tentative Map.
<br />Mr. Fales stated that a Landscape architect will make recommendations on park
<br />development at the appropriate time. Upon motion of Commissioner Rega, seconded
<br />by Commissioner Lozano, the following resolution was adopted by unanimous vote of
<br />those Commissioners present:
<br />RESOLUTION N0. 298
<br />RESOLVID
<br />The Tentative Subdivision Map for Tract No. 2573 (Mission
<br />Park Unit No. S) having come before this Commission as
<br />provided by Ordinance No. 358, is hereby approved, with the
<br />following modifications and conditions:
<br />See "Conditions of Approval of Tentative Map, Tract
<br />No. 2573" ae approved April 8, 1964, a copy of which
<br />ie attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
<br />The next item on the agenda was discussion of proposed Land use, proposed Amexa-
<br />tion No. 34, Berry Farm Annex. Mr. Fetes explained that this item is on the agenda
<br />at the request of the owners of the property who have previously requested annexa-
<br />tion to the City. The applicant ie willing to annex under certain conditions, and
<br />
|