My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN061080
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1980
>
CCMIN061080
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:51:51 AM
Creation date
11/11/1999 12:02:02 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.
/
9
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
Mr. Jack Parker, 7452 Mui~ood Court, stated he felt Council's decision tonight <br />was a direct result of Livermore's stand taken at their City Council meeting last <br />night in opposition to the water slide at Shadow Cliffs Park. He felt Council <br />should hear the public input at tomorrow night's public hearing meeting. Mr. <br />Parker stated he was in favor of the water slide and felt what Council did to- <br />night was unfair based on the meeting tomorrow night where East Bay Regional Park <br />District will present additional information. He added that Council's stand to- <br />night will effect the discussions tomorrow night. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Kephart and Mayor Mercer responded that their decision was made <br /> in direct response to the Environmental Impact Report, and not to Livermore's <br /> position on this matter. <br /> <br /> Mr. Vincent Castillo, 3790 Gettysburg Court North, stated he felt Council was <br />premature in taking their stand because not enough time had been given for review. <br />He stated he was in favor of the water slide at Shadow Cliffs Park. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARINGS <br />Appeal of a decision of the Planning Commission denyin~ the application of Mildred <br />R. Vallarino to rezone the 4.4 acre site located at 3897.~ 3887~ ~889 Vineyard" <br />Avenue from the ~M-4000 (Residential 10 units per acre) District to the RM-1500 <br />(Residential 29 units per acre) District <br /> <br />On the basis of an Initial Study of the potential environmental impacts of the <br />EFo3ect~ the Director of Planning.and Commu. nity Development has determined that <br />~e prop03ed pro3ect would not. have any potential significant adverse effects on <br />the environment and that an environmental impact report need not be prepared. <br />~is Initial Study is available for review at the Planni~5. Division, 200 Bernal <br />Avenue, Pleasanton. Comments on this d~cision may be directed to either the <br />P_!annin~ staff prior to ~ above meetipg date~.Or ~.irec~ly to the Cit~ council <br />at the above noticed meeting <br />(Continued Open from 5-13-80) <br /> Mayor Mercer declared this public hearing continued Open to the meeting of <br />August 12, 1980, 8:00 P.M., Fairgrounds Cafeteria, at the request of William Hirst, <br />Attorney representing the appellant. <br /> <br />~ppeal of Dennis Avakian e.t al of .~ decision of the Board of Adjustment to deny <br />y. ithout prejudice their application "for a V~rianCe f~om.the parking'and setback <br />Zequirements of the Ordinance Code of t~e City of Pleasanton to allow the con- <br />struction of two'additional dw~llin~ u~its at.4578 Augustine Street. The prO, <br />E~I~y is zoned RM-1500 (Multiple-Residential) District <br /> Mr. Harris presented his report dated June 3, 1980, regarding this matter. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing open. <br /> <br /> Mr. Dennis Avakian, 3937 Petrified Forest Court, appellant, presented drawings <br />showing his proposed development and its proximity to other buildings in the area. <br />He also presented his reasons for requesting a Variance from the parking and set- <br />back requirements of the Code to allow construction of two additional one-story <br />dwelling units, stating that it is an architecturally pleasing project, convenient <br />to downtown, and easily accessible for senior citizens. He advised he had worked <br />with City staff on the layout and felt the project complied with the criteria of <br />the Code. Mr. Avakian stated he had attempted by letter to establish an access <br />easement on the adjoining property of Mr. Isaac but had received no response so <br />he felt this was a moot point. Mr. Avakian requested Council to favorable con- <br />sider his appeal. <br /> <br /> 6. 6/lo/8o <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.