My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN110883
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1983
>
CCMIN110883
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:52:19 AM
Creation date
11/10/1999 12:13:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
475 <br /> <br /> taken into consideration. Staff stated that the extension of West Las Positas <br /> Boulevard is not included in the Capital Improvement Program at this time. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mark Wegrich, 4372 Pleasanton Avenue, suggested to Council that street names <br />be stamped on the curbs at all intersections to assist pedestrians in locating <br />streets~ He stated he had concerns regarding preservation of streams in the area. <br />He requested Council to create a buffer area to maintain the integrity of the park <br />way. Mayor Butler advised that the arroyos are under the jurisdiction of Zone 7 but <br />the City is working with them relative to greenbelt areas. <br /> <br /> Mr. Jack Holvingh referred to two recent articles in the newspapers relative to <br />Proclaiming Year of the Bible, and Council opposition to low-income housing set- <br />asides for sewer permits. He stated he felt this was contradictory and insensitive <br />on the part of the Council° Mayor Butler stated that Council is not opposed to low <br />income housing and explained that the low income housing set-aside has not been used <br />recently but that any application for this type of housing would be considered. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARINGS <br />Application of the City of Pleasanton to amend the ~eneral plan Growth Management <br />Element to clarify the interpretation to be ~iven to the existing goals and policies <br />contained therein as they relate to the approval of a new industrial~ commercial and <br />offices development <br /> <br />Consider Adoption of Environmental Impact Report <br /> <br />Application of the Prudential Insurance Company of America and Callahan-Pentz Pro- <br />perties for Planned Unit Development (PUD-Industrial/Commercial and Offices) zonin~ <br />and development plan approval of a 573 acre "business park" to include approx.!mate!y <br />23 net acres of "garden" offices, 62 net acres of general offices~ 50 net acres of <br />"mid-rise" officest 47 net acres of industrial/warehousing, 273 net acres of re- <br />search and development/light manufacturing~ and 3~, acr?s q.f retail commercial/ <br />financial development with the remaining approximately. 80 acres to be used for <br />street and flood channel right-of-way purposest to be located on th~ east side of. <br />Hopyard Road between the Arroyo Mocho and a point .approximately 1400 feet south of <br />1-580 and extending east to the tracks of the Southern Pacific TFansportation Com- <br />pany. Zoning for the. property is PUD (Planned Unit Development)-Commercial Freeway~ <br />Offices~ Industri_aA P~Fk~ GeneFal I.ndustrial~ and Light Industrial District <br /> <br />Consider Adoption of Environmental Impact Report <br /> Mr. Harris presented his reports (SR 83:499 and SR 83:498 respectively) dated <br />November 3, 1983, regarding these two items. He also presented written comments from <br />BART and CalTrans relative to the EIR for the growth management element and Hacienda <br />Business Park, and the responses to these comments. <br /> <br /> Mr. MacDonald summarized the general plan amendment, emphasizing that Council is <br />expecting more comprehensive recommendations regarding the growth management element <br />from the Industrial General Plan Review Committee. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Mercer asked how the current Environmental Impact Report differed <br />from the original EIR. Mr. MacDonald advised that the new EIR has been updated with <br />more refined information and goes beyond the legal requirements relative to regional <br />transportation study, housing balance, and a comprehensive listing of alternatives <br />available to City Council. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Mercer asked how the mitigation agreement fits into this scheme. <br />Mr. MacDonald advised that every developer in North Pleasanton has been required to <br />enter into a mitigation measures agreement with the City; and that these agreements <br />are basically the same relative to water, fire, traffic, and noise. He stated that <br />Prudential Insurance Company and Callahan-Pentz have entered into these agreements and <br />must comply with the conditions contained therein. <br /> 4. 11/8/83 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.