CCMIN021081 - Laserfiche WebLink

( a Negative Declaration was sufficient for the smaller projects but that an Environ- mental Impact Report should be required for the large projects. Mrs. Kay Stephens, 2477 Santa Rita Road, representing rental persons at a certain apartment complex on Santa Rita Road, stated that many people would like to attend a meeting to discuss their feelings about the rental issue. She asked when this group could attend a Council meeting to voice their opinions. After discussion, Council determined to take further public testimony relative to the Condominium Conversion Ordinance at the City Council meeting of March 24, 1981. The City Attorney advised a decision by Council on the Condominium Conversion Ordi- nance could be extended an additional eight months if necessary. PUBLIC HEARINGS Application of Dorothy N. Johnson to rezone from the R-1-6500 (Single-Family Resi- dential) District to the PUD (Planned Unit DevelopmentSMedium Dens..~ty Residential).. District an approximately 10 acre site located on the south side of Vineyard Avenue approximatel~ 120 feet west of Pico Avenue On the basis of an Initial Study of the potential enviror~.enta! impacts of.the.. project, the Director of Planning and Comanunity Development has determ.~ne~ that the. proposed prOJect would not have any potential significant adverse effects on the environment and that an environmental impact report need not b~ prepared.. ~h.i~ Initial Study is available for review at the Planning DiviSion,. 200 Berna.l..Avenue, Pleasanton. Comments on this decision may be directed to either the Planning staff prior to the above meeting date~ or dir.ectly to the City Couq9.~l at.the above noticed meeting Mr. Harris presented his report (SR 81:43) dated February 3, 1981, regarding this matter. Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing open on the application and the Negative Declaration. Mr. Jack Bras, Architect representing Dorothy Johnson, stated that the number of units in this proposed development had been reduced from 101 and 56 units. He stated that the conditions established by Planning Commission were .acceptable. Mr. Archie Stanley, 856 Aramon Court, Real Estate Broker, stated he had met with approximately fifteen residents in the area to resolve their concerns relative to this project and that most of the residents were now in support of the final plan.. Mrs. Nancy A. Storch, 3193 Chardonnay Drive, expressed concern that there was no park for the residents in the lower Vintage Hills-Flair Shopping Center area of the City, and that plans had been dropped for a park on the subject property, while approving or favoring high and medium density development for the land. She urged Council to plan now for a park in this area. Mrs. Storch also expressed concern regarding access to the proposed development. Councilmember Butler advised Mrs. Storch that Kottinger Park is available to everyone in the Vintage Hills area and has access from several directions. Mr. Carl Walter, 627 Rowell Lane, stated he strongly objected to the easement access into the proposed development, and also felt the density should be lowered. He objected to the cul-de-sac design stating it would create a traffic hazard. He felt the area could be better served by designing a street running north and south within the ten acres. Mr.Walter stated he had not been invited to any meetings with the developer to discuss his concerns. He requested Council to give further consideration to reduction in density, better traffic circulation, and a quiet design for Rowell Lane. 5. 2/10/81