Laserfiche WebLink
It was moved by Councilmember Butler, and seconded by Councilmember Wood, that <br /> Resolution No. 80-164, determining on the basis of a review of initial environ- <br /> mental study done for this project, that no significant environmental impact would <br /> occur as outlined in the City's guidelines and that a Negative Delcaratton is appro- <br /> priate to fezone a 2 acre site located at 3851 Vineyard Avenue from the RM-1500 <br /> (Multiple-Residential) District to the PUD-Residential (Planned Unit Development- <br /> Residential) District and for development plan approval for a 48-unit multi-family <br /> residential complex to be located behind the existing duplex on the site, be adopted. <br /> The roll call vote was as follows: <br /> AYES: Councilmembers Butler, Mohr, Wood, and Mayor Mercer <br /> NOES: None <br /> ABSENT: Councilmember Kephart <br /> <br /> After discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Wood, and seconded by Council- <br />member Mohr, that Ordinance No. 937, to be read by title only and waiving further <br />reading thereof, approving the application of Joe Madden to fezone a 2 acre site <br />located at 3851 Vineyard Avenue from the RM-1500 (Multiple-Residential) District ~o <br />the PUD-Residential (Planned Unit Development-Residential) District and for develop- <br />ment plan approval for a 48-unit multi-family residential complex to be located <br />behind the existing duplex on the site, subject to conditions established by Plan- <br />ning Commission Resolution No. 1884, but deleting Condition 3 (that no building <br />permits shall be issued for construction of dwelling units on this site until a <br />vehicular connection has been made from Pico Avenue to Stanley Boulevard), and <br />amending the Zoning Map of the City of Pleasanton accordingly, be introduced. <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers Butler, Mohr, Wood,.and Mayor Mercer <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: Councilmember Kephart <br /> <br />Adoption of 1980-8~.City of Pleasanton operatin8 B~dge~ ~nd Capital...Improvement <br />Program <br /> Mr. Walker presented his report dated June 18, 1980, regarding this matter. <br />He stated that Council should hold a separate public hearing relative to Revenue <br />Sharing on Public Safety. He advised that staff .' held a public hearing on <br />this matter on May 14, 1980, at 3:00 P.M., but that no one artended this public <br />hearing. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing open on the 1980-81 City of Pleasanton <br />Operating Budget and Capital Improvement Program. <br /> <br /> No one in the audience spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing closed. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing open on the use of Revenue Sharing <br />Funds. <br /> <br /> No one in the audience spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing closed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Walker stated that the 1980-81 Budget recommends that the total Revenue <br />Sharing funds be expended on public safety. <br /> <br /> After discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Mohr, and seconded by Council- <br />member Butler, that Resolution No. 80-165, approving the 1980-81 City of Pleasanton <br />Operating Budget, be adopted. <br /> <br /> 4. 6/24/80 <br /> <br /> <br />