CCMIN051380 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Harris advised that an Environmental Impact Report would be required on this annexation for the prezoning process. Appeal of a decision of the Planning Commission denyin~ th.~.. application of Mildred R. Vallarino to fezone the 4.4 acre site located at 3897, 3887, 3889 Vineyard Ave~u~e' from the RM-4000 (Residential 10 units per acre) District to the R}I-1500 (Residen- tial 29 units per acre) District On the basis of an Initial Study of the potential environmental impacts of the pro, ject~ the Director of Planning and Community Development has determined that the p.roposed project would not have any potential significant adverse effects on the environment and that an environmental impact report need no.t be prepared. This· Initial Study is available for review at the Plannin~ Division~ 200 Bernal AvenUes. Pleasanton. Comments on this decision may be directed to either the Planning staff prior to the above meeting date~ or directly to the. City Council at the a~.ov.e noticed meetin~ Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing open on this item and continued to the meeting of June 10, 1980, 8:00 P.M., Fairgrounds Cafeteria, at the request of William Hirst, Attorney, dated May 8, 1980, representing the appellant. Appeal of Bay Heritage Financial Corporation of certain conditions of approval attachedto Case Z-80-43 by the Design Review Board. Case Z-80-43 pertains to design review of a 72,366 Sg' ft. office buil.ding proposed to be constructed at the northeast corner of Foothill Road and Deodar..W. ay adjacent to the Stoneridge Regional Shopping Center Mr. Harris presented his report dated May 6, 1980, regarding this matter. Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing open on this item. Mr. Don Geddes, Architect representing Bay Heritage Financial Corporation, stated this firm agreed with all of staff recommendations except for the 25 ft. wide parking aisles vs. 24 ft. wide parking aisles. Mr. Geddes reviewed the regional shopping center parking aisle standards, and stated that since the pro- posed building is to be an office complex he felt that 24 ft. wide parking aisles were adequate and would retain the appropriate landscaping. Mr. Avnar Naggar, Architect for the Taubman Company, stated he felt that the 24 ft. wide parking aisles were adequate, especially since the trend is for smaller cars, however, this width would easily accommodate larger automobiles. Mr. Naggar stated he did not feel this presented any jeopardy or need for concern. Mrs. Diane McMichael, 7499 Hillsdale Drive, asked why the Planning Commission recommended 25 ft. instead of 24 ft. wide parking aisles. Mr. Harris advised that it was the opinion of the Planning Commission and staff that 24 ft. wide parking aisles did not seem sufficient or safe for larger cars and recreational vehicles, and that the extra foot was recommended as added safety. Mr. William Kovac, 3124 Weymouth Court, stated he felt the CC&R regulations should not be changed as this might set a precedent. There being no further testimony, Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing closed. It was moved by Councilmember Wood, and seconded by Councilmember Kephart, that Resolution No. 80-123, determining on the basis of a review of intial environmental study done for this project, that no significant environmental impact would occur as Cit ' outlined in the y s guidelines and that a Negative Declaration is appropriate to lo. 5/13/80