CCMIN022673 - Laserfiche WebLink

1. Posting in the sales o£fice include reference not only to existence of the Sewage Treatment Plant to the Tracts, but also to the existence of the so- called Qualified Investors parcel adjacent on the west. 2. That the property owners along the westerly boundary of Tract 3311 construct a fence, of masonry or stone, to provide a buffer. Mr. Hirst recommended that the S District be allowed to lapse on Tracts 3311 and 3312, and that Parcel #941-1302-2-19 be placed in the S District. It was moved by Councilman Herlihy, and seconded by Councilman Mori, that the public hearing be closed. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmen Herlihy, Mori, Pearson, and Mayor Reid NOES: None ABSENT: Councilman Kinney It was moved by Councilman Herlihy, and seconded by Councilman Mori, to dis- miss this item from the agenda. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmen Herlihy, Mori, and Mayor Reid NOES: Councilman Pearson ABSENT: Councilman Kinney MATTERS CONTINUED FOR DECISION Appeal of John quindimil~ 590 Mission Dr.~ Pleasanton~ of the PlanninS Commission decision approving a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of the Pleasanton Joint School District Administration Office to be located on the district school site in the Mission Park Development Mr. Edgar stated this matter was continued from the meeting of 2-20-73. He further stated a petition had been filed by the residents of the Mission Park area, - which reads as follows: "We the Undersigned, residents of Mission Park development, are opposed to the construction of the school district office at the east end of Mission Drive". This petition was signed by 140 residents. Mr. Edgar stated further that the school district has been unable to answer a number of questions that have arisen and requested this matter be continued in order to ascertain the answers to questions regarding alternatives, etc. Mr. John Quindimil, 590 Mission Drive, stated that since the last City Council meeting, the residents of Mission Park have had a chance to further study the location of the school district office site and are more firmly convinced that it is not a good location. He further stated they had met with the School District Board but did not receive answers to all of their questions. Mr. Ron Bolt, 576 Mission Drive, stated the meeting with the School District Board was a good one, but he still felt this type of office structure in a resi- dential area should be denied. Mr. Jerry Stever, 520 Junipero Street, expressed his concern, as the father of two small children, regarding the traffic hazard created by this type of office. He stated that he had helped circulate the petition and every resident he spoke with was in opposition to the proposed school district office location on this site. ..... Mr. Dave Kiilsgaard, 506 Mission Drive, expressed concern regarding the economic feasibility of the p=oposed school district office at this location. Councilman Mori commented that a school has office space and generates a considerable amount of trafflc, and he felt that a school district offtce on a school size was a compatible location. Mayor Reid declared this matter be continued to the meeting of March 26, 1973. Mayor Reid recessed the meeting at 9:30 P.M. Mayor Reid reconvened the meeting at 9:35 P.M. 3. 2/26/73