Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Acosta mentioned the public hearing for the annexation would be opened on <br />July 20 and then continued to the special meeting. <br /> Ms. Michelotti had questions on the design review process, open fencing, color <br />palette and minimum setback requirements. She was also concerned about the bypass <br />road. <br /> <br />Item 6c <br />AP-99-03 (PUD-97-12}, New Cities Development Group} <br />Appeal of the Planning Commission denial of an application for PUD development <br />plan approval for 55 new single-family residential lots and the retention of one <br />existin~ sinpie-family home on an approximately 34.7 acre site located at 970 and <br />986 Sycamore road in the Noah Sycamore Specific Plan area. Zoning for the <br />property_ is PUD (Planned Unit Development} - LDR (Low Density Residential) <br />District. (SR99:177) <br /> <br /> This item was continued to a special meeting. <br /> <br /> There was a break at 10:17 p.m. <br /> <br /> The meeting reconvened at 10:25 p.m. <br /> <br />Item 6d. <br />Direction to the Planning Commission concerning the San Francisco Bernal Avenue <br />pronertv. (SR99:195) <br /> <br /> Michael Roush presented the staff report. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala asked if San Francisco was still agreeable to not meeting the <br />November election. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said San Francisco is prepared to accept a short continuance <br />recognizing that that continuance means the item will not be on the November ballot. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver had a strong desire to have this item on a November ballot. <br />Therefore, the question is does San Francisco want this item on the November 1999 <br />ballot or the November 2000 ballot. He wanted an election that would have the best turn <br />out. He felt there was no need to continue this item for a month and miss the November <br />1999 deadline for the ballot. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver asked for public testimony. <br /> <br /> Bruce Lymbum, representing San Francisco, thought the public review process <br />would have ended by June in order for Council to take action and place this item on the <br />November 1999 ballot. But an issue came up with the Planning Commission about <br />whether the Environmental Impact Report was legally adequate and other concems. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 17 07\06\99 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />