Laserfiche WebLink
At this time Mr. Boris Lakusta, Burke Critchfield, and David Marchant, <br />Attornies representing the gravel companies, s~gned the draft agreement on <br />behalf of their clients. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Councilman Kinney, and seconded by Councilman Mori, that <br />Resolution No. 72-122, apprcving the Agreement with the Gravel Companies, be <br />adopted. <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmen Herlihy, Kinney, Mori and Pearson <br />NOES: Mayor Reid <br />ABSENT: None <br /> <br /> It was moved by Councilman Pearson, and seconded by Councilman Mori, that <br />the waiving of the reading o£ Ordinance No. 667, an ordinance amending Chapter <br />V of Title V of the Ordinance Code of the City of Pleasanton relating to truck <br />routes by the deletion thereof and the addition of a new Chapter V relating to <br />the regulation of the use o£ City Street by trucks, and the adoption of Ordi- <br />nance No. 667, be dismissed from the agenda~ <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmen Herlihy, Kinney, Mori and Pearson <br />NOES: Mayor Reid <br />ABSENT: None <br /> <br /> It was moved by Councilman Mori, and seconded by Councilman Kinney, to waive <br />the reading of Ordinance No~ 670, an ordinance amending Chapter V of Title V of <br />the Ordinance Code of the City of Pleasanton relating to truck routes by the <br />deletion thereof and the addition of a new Chapter V relating to the regulation <br />of the use of City Streets by trucks, exempting the Stanley Blvd.-First Street- <br />Sunol Blvd. routes from the provisions of the ordinance. <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmen Herlihy, Kinney, Mori, Pear!son and Mayor Reid <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: None <br /> <br /> It was moved by Councilman Mori, and seconded by Councilman Pearson, that <br />Ordinance No. 670, an ordinance amending Chapter V o£ Title V of the Ordinance <br />Code of the City of Pleasanton relating to truck routes by the deletion thereof <br />and the addition of a new Chapter V relating to the regulation of the use of <br />City Streets by conunercia! vehicles, be adopted on an urgency basis, effective <br />immediately. <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmen Herlihy, Kinney, Mori and Pearson <br />NOES: Mayor Reid <br />ABSENT: None <br /> <br />Application of the Planning Commission of the City of Pleasanton to amend the <br />existing zoning for that property bounded on the no=th b~ Interstate Highway <br />#580~ on the east b~ Interstate Highway #680~ on the south b~ Stoneridge Drive <br />and on the west b Foohtill Road._ Said propert~ and proposed amendments des- <br />cribed more precisel~ as follows: To the C-R (Commercial Regional) District <br />those parcels defined as follows: Portion of 941-1201-12-3~ 941-1201-9s <br />Portion of 941-1201-10~ 941-1201-8~ 941-~1201-7~ 941-1201-6~ Portion of <br />941-1201-5~ 941-1201-1~ Portion of 941-1201-2~ said parcels containin~ more <br />or less 178.045 acres. To the P.U.D. Multiple District those parcels defined <br />as follows: Portion of 941-1201-12-3~ Portion of 941-1201-10s Portion of <br />.941-1201-5~ Portion of 941-1201-2~ 94~L!201-3~ 941-1201-4, 941-1201-11~ said <br />parcels containing more or less 97.645 acres <br /> Mr. Edgar stated that due to a recent California Supreme Court deuision, an <br />Environmental Impact Statement would be required before a decision could be made <br />regarding this matter. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Councilman Pearson, and seconded by Councilman Herlihy, that <br />the application of the Planning Commission of the City of Pleasanton to amend <br />the existing zoning for that property bounded on the north by Interstate Highway <br />#580, on the east by Interstate Highway #680, on the south by Stoneridge Drive <br />and on the west by Foothill Road, said property and proposed amendments described <br />above, be continued to the meeting of October 30, 1972, and that the staff be <br />instructed to prepared an Environmental Impact Statement for hearing at that time. <br /> <br /> 3. 10/9/72 <br /> <br /> <br />