|
5. One additional parking apace, numbered 33 on the approved
<br />Site Pian, be installed at the southeast corner of the
<br />site, within Che rear parking area, as indicated and
<br />initialed on the approved Site Plan
<br />The next item on the agenda was the application of Mrs TlW: Goe, 901 Santa Rita
<br />Road, Pleasanton, for a Zoning Permit with Site Plan and Architectural Approval, is
<br />order to construct a Type 4 portable steel building for storage and general purposes
<br />relating to a used auto business at 901 Santa Rita Road, in a C-T District. Mr,
<br />Falea was called upon for the staff report, and stated that this is a permitted land
<br />use in a GT District. The minimum lot area permitted is 10,000 aq. fC., and the
<br />total lot area of the subject property is more than 50,000 aq, ft. Maximum lot
<br />coverage allowed is 259., and the lot coverage 1n this instance is less than 25X.
<br />Front, aide and rear yard setbacks meet requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr.
<br />Falea stated further that considering this is a newly-annexed area to the City,
<br />the staff recommends the following conditions be attached to granting of the Zoning
<br />Permit: (1) Site drainage and sanitary sewer facilities, where needed, be installed
<br />to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (2) The flashing sign which advertises
<br />the used car lot be removed since it constitutes a traffic hazard in the opinion of
<br />the Police Department. Mr. Goe was present in the audience. City Attorney
<br />Struthers was called upon, and he stated that concerning the question of whether
<br />control of the sign would be a reasonable condition to the granting of a permit for
<br />additional use of the property, the Planning Commission can put the burden on the
<br />applicant, The Ordinance states uo sign shall be allowed in the City which shall
<br />be a hazard or confuses traffic. Mr. Struthers felt it would be a valid condition
<br />at the Planning Commission level. Upon inquiry by Commissioner P.ega, Mr, Goe said
<br />he plane to use the building for repairing care. After considerable discussion,
<br />upon motion of Commissioner Rega, seconded by Commissioner Antonini, the following
<br />resolution was unanimously adopted by those Commissioners present:
<br />RESOLUTION N0. 197
<br />Wx_:EREAS, application having been made under Article 19, Ordinance No.
<br />309, by Mr. T,[d. Goe, 901 Santa Pita Aoad, Pleasanton, for a
<br />Zoning Permit with Site Plan and Architectural Approval, in order to
<br />construct a Type 4 portable steel building for storage and general
<br />purposes relating to a used auto business at 901 Santa Bita Road, in
<br />a C-T District, has come before this Commission;
<br />NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
<br />RESOLVID, that the City of Pleasanton Planning Commission does hereby
<br />approve said application for Zoning Permit, with Site Plan
<br />and Architectural Approval, with the following conditions attached thereto;
<br />1. Site drainage and sanitary sewer facilities, where
<br />needed, be installed to the satisfaction of the City
<br />Engineer.
<br />2, The flashing advertising sign for the property located
<br />on Santa Pita Road either be removed or be negated as
<br />a traffic hazard by eliminating the flashing aspects of
<br />said sign.
<br />Under Comotunications, Secretary Fales presented an oral communication from the City
<br />Council: At the meeting of December 17, the Council reviewed the report of the
<br />Plamting Commission with respect to relocation of a major City thoroughfare, The
<br />Commission reco~nded changing the original General Plan route to a more cwrtharly
<br />route, The Council agreed in principle with the recommendation of the Commission,
<br />and now refers the report back to the Commission for aetti~ of public hearings.
<br />With the Commisaloa'e permission, the staff volunteered to set public hearings
<br />starting January 17,
<br />Secretary Falea then stated the Council asked for proposals from consultant firma
<br />to do a revision of the General Plan and Civic Center and Central Business Diagrict
<br />portions thereof, Twelve firms were contacted by letter, and nine responses were
<br />received. The Council has selected four firms for further interviews. The firma
<br />were evaluated according to ten characteristics, with ten items included in each
<br />characteristic, The Council authorized the staff to contact the four firms for
<br />
|