My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN080696
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
CCMIN080696
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:45 AM
Creation date
5/13/1999 10:55:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
8/6/1996
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
vineyard CorridOr <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis referred to the request for separation of the properties west of the landfill. <br />She wanted this property included in the specific plan because of the design guidelines issues. <br />She could agree to a separation after the specific plan has been completed and design guidelines <br />established. A concern of Mr. McGuire was the length of time this will take. Ms. Dennis <br />appreciated that, but she wanted to see how the entire Vineyard Corridor will look before taking <br />out any properties. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti indicated that all land use designations are removed when the drafting of <br />the specific plan begins. The target 150 units would then be spread throughout the entire area. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush reminded Council that interim development plans had been adopted by <br />Council for the Vineyard Avenue Corridor as well as for the North Sycamore Specific Plan area, <br />which provides that while the General Plan review process is occurring, someone can build a <br />single family home on an existing lot of record. When the General Plan is adopted, the interim <br />policy can continue until the specific plan is completed. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Ms. Mohr, seconded by lVls. Michelotti, to exclude the properties <br />west of the landf'~l from the Vineyard Corridor and to retain the current designations. <br /> <br /> Mr. Rasmussen pointed out that there was a recommendation to designate the Gooch <br />property as medium density. He requested clarification whether the Gooch property and another <br />property north of the re, aligned "S " curve (property owned by Allec and about 1-1/2 acres of the <br />dump site), should be medium density as recommended in the General Plan Draft Update or <br />should all of the land west of the landfill be low density. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico was sympathetic to this issue, but all energies should be directed at getting a <br />plan for the entire area. If, after a reasonable period of time, it appears that is not possible or <br />there is protracted litigation, then if these property owners come up with a development <br />proposal, Council could exclude them at that time. He felt it was necessary to get a total <br />package for this corridor. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver agreed. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr indicated her motion stands with the designations as shown on the map. <br /> <br />The roll Call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers - Michelotti and Mohr <br />NOES: Councilmembers - Dennis, Pico, and Mayor Tarver <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br /> The motion failed. <br /> <br />08/06/96 -22- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.