Laserfiche WebLink
111 <br /> <br /> MATTERS CONTINUED FOR DECISION <br /> Adoption..of Ordinance No. 1148~ approving RZ-84-12, Application of the City of <br /> Pleasanton to amend the Ordinance Code to increase the length of outdoor sales <br /> events from a maximum of three days to five days per event <br /> (Intro. 8-14-84, 3-Ayes, i-No, 1-Absent) <br /> Mayor Mercer stated that Ordinance No. 1148 was introduced on August 14, 1984 <br /> by a vote of 3-Ayes, 1-No, 1-Absent, and that it was now in order to adopt the <br /> ordinance. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Councilmember Mohr, and seconded by Councilmember Wood, that <br /> Ordinance No. 1148, amending Section 2-10.25, Article 21, Chapter 2, Title II of <br /> the Ordinance Code of the City of Pleasanton, extending length of outdoor sales to <br /> five days, be adopted. <br /> The roll call vote was as follows: <br /> AYES: Councilmembers Mohr, Wood, and Mayor Mercer <br /> NOES: None <br /> ABSENT: Councilmembers Brandes and Butler <br /> <br /> Adoption of Ordinance No. 1149, approving RZ-84-8~ Application of the City of <br /> Pleasanton to prezone the approximately 8 acre sitelocated on the north side of <br /> Vineyard Avenue opposite Mavis Drive to the PUD (Planned Unit Development)-Medium <br />· Density Residential District <br /> (Intro. 8-14-84, 4-Ayes, 1-Absent) <br /> Mayor Mercer stated that Ordinance No. 1149 was introduced on August 14, 1984 <br /> by a vote of 4-Ayes, 1-Absent, and that it was now in order to adopt the ordinance. <br /> <br /> Mr. Howard Garrigan, 389 Mavis Drive, representing residents in his area, stated <br /> they are not against annexation of this property but are opposed to medium density <br /> residential zoning for this particular parcel. He stated he has grave concerns re- <br /> garding potential problems that would arise from multiple density development, <br /> especially traffic. He requested Council to put this property into a study district <br /> and review the long range development and alternatives for use of the subject area. <br /> <br /> Mr. Frank Belecky, 892 Medeira, representing the Vintage Hills Homeowners Asso- <br /> ciation, stated this group supports the position of the Mavis Drive residents for no <br /> more building on Vineyard Avenue. Me stated he felt that if zoning is required for <br /> annexation it should allow for no more than 5 ~nlits per acre, single family residential. <br /> <br /> Mr. Steve Hughes, 587 ToEriga Court, stated the City continues to approve small <br /> projects in this area, stating that each small project will not adversely impact <br /> traffic on Vineyard Avenue, but in his opinion the total amount'has a serious adverse <br /> impact on this street. He stated he supports the comments of Mr. Belecky. <br /> <br /> Mr. Harris advised that a project plan has been submitted to the City for detached <br /> residences on two acres of the subject property, that would be close to 10 units per <br /> acre (19 units). <br /> <br /> After discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Wood, and seconded by Council- <br /> member Mohr, that Ordinance No. 1149, be re-introduced, changing RZ-84-8, application <br /> of the City of Pleasanton to prezone the approximately 8 acre site located on the <br /> north side of Vineyard Avenue opposite Mavis Drive to the Study District (not the <br /> Medium Density PUD District as originally proposed), and referring the item back to <br /> Planning Commission because of substantial modification to the ordinance. <br /> The roll call vote was as follows: <br /> AYES: Councilmembers Mohr, Wood, and Mayor Mercer <br /> NOES: None <br /> ABSENT: Councilmembers Brandes and Butler <br /> <br /> 6. 8/28/84 <br /> <br /> <br />