My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN091872
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1970-1979
>
1972
>
CCMIN091872
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:47:28 AM
Creation date
11/17/1999 11:57:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
It was moved by Councilman Kinney, and seconded by Councilman Herlihy, that <br /> Ordinance No~ 675, approving the application of the Planning Commission to fezone <br /> from the A (Agricultural) District to the I-G (General Industry) District that <br /> property fronting Oakland Avenue immediately north and adjacent to the 3~ A. Jenks <br /> Company property, containing 1.45 acres, more or less, be introduced. <br /> The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmen Herlihy, Kinney, Mori, Pearson and Mayor Reid <br />NOES: None <br />-- ABSENT: None <br /> <br /> Application of the Planning Commission to amend Title II of the Ordinance Code <br /> of the City of Pleasanton relating to zonin~ to make office uses~ other than <br /> medical or dental offices~ conditionally permitted uses in Light Industry~ <br /> Industrial Park and General Industry Districts of the City of Pleasanton <br /> Mayor Reid declared the public hearing open. <br /> Mr. Castro presented the staff report regarding this matter. <br /> Mr. Brad Hirst, 2456 Minivet Court, spoke in opposition to this application, <br /> stating that it would discourage industrial development within the City of Pleasan- <br /> ton, and that it was not practical because of delays for zoning. He further stated <br /> there would be enforcement problems, and difficulty for developers to obtain tenants, <br /> with these restrictions. Mr. Hirst stated it was his feeling that to encourage re- <br /> stricted uses was not in the best interests of the City. <br /> Mr. Rank Farrow, San Ramon Village Company, also spoke in opposition to this <br /> application, stating that his company was involved in the progress of industrial <br /> park area, and that some office uses were compatible and should be allowed, while <br /> others were not, but that a positive statement should be made in favor of uses° <br /> He further stated this amendment to the Ordinance Code was not sound for industrial <br /> development. <br /> Mr. Joe Chickerilla, Mission Park Development Company, spoke in opposition to <br /> this amendment, stating there was already enough protection to the City, that it <br /> would create added expenses for the developer, and discourage any user~ <br /> It was moved by Councilman Mori, and seconded by Councilman Herlihy, that the <br /> public hearing be closed. <br /> The roll call vote was as follows: <br /> AYES: Councilmen Herlihy, Kinney, Mori, Pearson and Mayor Reid <br /> NOES: None <br /> ABSENT: None <br /> <br /> Councilman Kinney stated the testimony presented by the developers made a good <br /> deal of sense, and questioned the permitted types of office uses suitable to in- <br /> dustrial park areas. Mr.'Castro replied that it would mean befining as many uses <br /> as you could think about, that the main concern of this amendment was to protect <br /> the industrial park areas from offices not compatible for this kind of development. <br /> Councilman Pearson stated this amendment would have far-reaching implications <br /> because of the proposed 6,000 acres of in~ustrial development in the Valley, and <br /> felt it should be included in the study session with the Planning Commission later <br /> this month. <br /> Councilman Mori stated a need for a better definition regarding types of <br /> officeso <br /> Councilman Herlihy stated it was for the CIty Council to decide how to imple- <br /> ment the permitted uses in an industrial area. <br /> It was moved by Councilman Kinney, and seconded by Councilman Pearson, that <br /> the matter of the application of the Planning Commissi~a to amend Title II of the <br /> Ordinance Code of the City of Pleasanton relating to zoning to make office uses, <br /> other than medical or dental offices, conditionally permitted uses in Light In- <br /> dustry, Industrial Park and General Industry Districts of the City of Pleasanton, <br /> be included in the study session with the Planning ~ission on September 27, 1972. <br />__ The roll call vote was as follows: <br /> AYES: Councilmen Kinney, Mori and Pearson <br /> NOES: Councilman Herlihy and Mayor Reid <br /> ABSENT: None <br /> <br /> MATTERS CONTINUED FOR DECISION <br /> There were no matters continued for decision. <br /> <br /> 2. 9/18/72 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.