Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Mike Cooper of Cooper and Sword, 200 Rose Avenue, stated <br />that he prepared the layout of the plan and would be willing to <br />answer questions on this. He explained that he looked into the <br />feasibility of the infrastructure and utilities as well as the <br />traffic issue of the project. He stated that the McDowells are <br />willing to participate financially in the Vineyard Avenue <br />realignment as well as the installation of the Vineyard Avenue- <br />Bernal Avenue sewer pipeline, if the City would include the <br />project's sewer and street system in its service area. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr inquired if the use by PG&E of the Vineyard Avenue <br />alignment right-of-way would be compatible with the project. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cooper replied that he did not know the detail or <br />extensiveness the PG&E project would require but the street would <br />be wide enough to provide for both the right-of-way and the paved <br />area. <br /> <br /> Mr. Bob Graham, 2503 Vineyard Avenue, stated that he was <br />excited about the development because it would have open space and <br />preserve the vineyards. <br /> <br /> Mr. Emil Oxsen, 403 Neal Street, a developer in Pleasanton, <br />stated that the project should be considered for its merits <br />because it is contiguous to the City and something Pleasanton <br />could be proud of. <br /> <br /> Mr. Stanley Rathbone stated that in the 1930's a Pleasanton <br />family started a garbage business and used the project's site as <br />the dumping area. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer stated that Mr. McDowell has been informed about <br />that. <br /> <br /> There being no further testimony, Mr. Mercer declared the <br />public hearing closed. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Mr. Brandes, and seconded by Mr. Mercer, that <br />Resolution No. 89-522 be adopted, based on a review of an initial <br />environmental study done for this project and on a finding that no <br />significant environmental impact would occur as outlined in the <br />City's guidelines and on a further finding that a negative <br />declaration is appropriate in connection with AP-89-21, the appeal <br />of a decision of the Planning Commission which denied approval of <br />Cases GP-89-6 and RZ-89-16, the application of James and Susan <br />McDowell to amend the land use element designation of the General <br />Plan for an approximately 4.37 acre site located at 2503 Vineyard <br />Avenue from "Agricultural and Grazing" to the "Low or Medium <br />Density Residential" designation and to prezone the same property <br />to the PUD (Planned Unit Development) - Low Density Residential <br />District or to any other designations Deemed in the public <br />interest. <br /> <br /> -13 - <br /> 12-12-89 <br /> <br /> <br />