03/17/60 - Laserfiche WebLink

IN THE PIANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA Minutes March 17, 1960 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Pleasanton Planning Commission was called to order at the City Hall on March 17, 1960 at 8:05 P.M. Chairman Hanifen presiding. ROLL CALL: Present - Commissioners Allison, Landon, Lozano and Hanifen Absent -Commissioner Mitchell On motion of Commissioner Tendon, seconded by Commissioner Lozano, and approved by all Commissioners present, the minutes of March 3, 1960 were approved as corrected. Jim Brien represented the Pleasanton Heights Swim Club in their application for a Conditional Zoning Permit. Public hearing was then he~.d on the application of Delmer R. and Madge D. Merton For a Conditional Zoning Permit to raise pigeons on property located at 3955 and 3971 Vineyard Avenue. The correspondence of Mrs. Ana Reichmuth, requesting that this permit he granted, was read and also the correspondence from Julio L. Juarez, Chief, Bureau of Sanitation Southern District of the Alameda County Health Department, stating the reasons why this permit should not be granted, was also read. Mrs. Hall brought forward two petitions, with a total of 62 names, reque^ting that this permit be denied. Paul Loretz spoke for the granting of this zoning permit. Mr. Merton stated that the pens would have fibre glass screening,;, and in that way they would be fly proof. He submitted plans for these pens. As the Zoning Ordinance states, any such farm must be 200' from any property line and these plans did not meet this specification. On motion of Commissioner Landon, seconded by Commissioner Lozano, and approved by all Commissioners present, the application of Mr. & Mrs. Merton to raise pigeons at 3955 and 3971 Vineyard Avenue was denied, as per RESOLUTIONT N0. 95: RESOLUTION N0. 95 Denying Conditional Zoning Permit on Application of Delmer R. and Madge D. Merton, 3955 and 3971 Vineyard Avenue, Pleasanton, California, Piled February 19, 1960, for commercial use. The above described application, having been duly considered, pursuant to Ordinance No. 293, of the City of Pleasanton, and good r_ause appearing; NOW THII2EFORE, the Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows: 1) That public hearing has been duly held. 2) That the Panning Commission finds the conditions of Section 2.22 of Ordinance No. 293 pertaining to commercial uses have not been met. 3) That a. CONDITIONAL ZONING PERMIT is hereby denied as to the following reason: a) Did not meet requirement of 200' from property line. 4) That the Secretary is hereby instructed to forward copies of this Resolution co she applicant, city officers and any other interested parties. Frann Oufdermaur then came before the Commission with his application for a Variance of 5' from required 20' setback Prom streets. Commissioner Landon made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Inzano, and approved by all Commissioners present, that RESOLUTION N0. 96 be sent to the City Council, recommending that the request for variance of 5' from ~^equired 20' setbacr> iron streets be granted: