Laserfiche WebLink
Sectio~ 6. '?i'*e City of Pleasar~ton spec~ifically op~loses the Las Pu.',itas <br />Neu 'fou_~ because the studies, information, and material, uhicb ha~e bee~ <br />made available thusfar have not adequately addressed themselves <br />e~vironmental concerns and more specifically ro the question of <br />deteriorating air quality resulting from this development. <br /> <br />Section 7. The City of Pleasanton s[~ecifically opposes the uoncept set <br />forth by the proponents of the New Town whereby growth would be reduced <br />w~thin existing communities and redistributed thYoughout the Valley <br />orjer to ~ccommodate the projected population of the New Town without <br />increasing the holding capacity of the Valley as a whole. <br /> <br />Sectiou 8. The City of Pleasanton also opposes the Las Positas >~ew <br /> <br />Town because the propoueuts of the plan have not adequate%y addressed <br />themselves to the provision of the uppropriate ana required services <br />which, therefore, renders the proposal utopian~ unrealistic, <br />practical, and ~ncapab!e of reasohably being i~npl~x~ented. <br /> <br />Section 9. The City Clerk is directed to transmit a copy of thi~; <br />resolution to the Alameda County Planning Commission, the Alameda <br /> <br />County Board of Supervisors, the City of Livermore, and the Valley <br />Community Services District. <br /> <br />S~ction i0. This resolution shall become effective ironedlately upon <br />its- 9assage and adoption. <br /> <br />Lt, ve!nbcr 4 ~ 1974 <br /> <br />J FTEST ~ <br /> <br />APPRtJVED AS TU FORH <br /> <br />City Attorx!ey <br /> -3- <br /> <br /> <br />