My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN021081
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1981
>
CCMIN021081
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:52:02 AM
Creation date
11/10/1999 11:28:03 PM
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.
/
20
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
Councilmember Butler stated he supports this application because of the need for <br />industrial development and because he feels it is important to reaffirm Council's <br />position that we do favor bringing jobs to the City and broadening the tax base. <br />Councilmember Butler added that the PUD zoning will give the City control of how <br />the project will be developed. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer stated he favored industrial growth but is concerned about the <br />wide blank spaces and the unknown problems that might be associated with these areas <br />that cannot be envisioned at this time. He stated he did not feel he had enough <br />answers to vote in favor of this project or any other project in this area. <br /> <br /> After discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Wood, and seconded by Council- <br />member Kephart, that Ordinance No. 962, to be read by title only and waiving further <br />reading thereof, approving the application of Reynolds and Brown for development <br />plan approval for the 60-acre site located immediately south of Johnson Drive and <br />about 700 feet west of Hopyard Road for the most southeasterly portion of the pro- <br />perry, the property is zoned PUD (Planned Unit Development) District, subject to <br />conditions established by Planning Commission and amended as recommended by the <br />Director of Planning and Community Development, and noting that precise information <br />is shown for 13 lots and 2 streets only, be introduced. <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers Butler, Kephart, Mohr, and Wood <br />NOES: Mayor Mercer <br />ABSENT: None <br /> <br /> Mr. Walker requested Council take action on the proposal presented by Water <br />Resources Engineers to conduct a Water Study in the vicinity of Hopyard Road and <br />1-580. It was moved by Councilmember Butler, and seconded by Councilmember Wood, <br />that Resolution No. 81-32, approving an agreement between Camp Dresser McKee, Inc., <br />Water Resource Division, to conduct an analysis of the City of Pleasanton water <br />system in the vicinity of Hopyard Road and 1-580, for an estimated cost of $11,000.00, <br />and amending the fiscal budget accordingly, be adopted. <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers Butler, Kephart, Mohr, Wood, and Mayor Mercer <br />NOES:· None <br />ABSENT: None <br /> <br />CitT. Council review of a decision of the Planning Commission approving the appli- <br />cation of Ernest Pestann for tentative map approval for Tract 4372 for a 49-1ot <br />si~le-famtl7 residential subdivision on a 35 acre site located between the Rose- <br />pqinte subdivision and Happy Valley .ROad, .~mmediately wes~;ly of Amber Lane. The <br />property is zoned R-I-20,000 (Single,Family Residential) District <br /> Mr. Harris presented his report (SR 81:44) dated February 4, 1981, regarding <br />this matter. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing open on this item. <br /> <br /> Mr. Karl Sehmsdorf, 6491 Arlington Drive, representing residents of Rosepointe, <br />stated this group favored retaining the park land because children in the area need <br />open space to play. He stated this group also had concerns about excessive traffic <br />and would like to have the street circulation redesigned to discourage increased <br />traffic in this area. Mr. Se~sdorf stated that homeowners in the area would be <br />willing to develop and maintain the park as a green belt area if the City could not <br />do so, so that children will have a place to play. <br /> <br /> u. 2/lO/Sl <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.