Laserfiche WebLink
4y~~8A"~°y CITY of PLEASANTr~N <br />,. . <br />'~~° Plannin CQ~nnrr~ission <br />~rrso g <br />MINUTES ~OF REGULAR MEETING. <br />Date May 12 , 1976 <br />Time : 8:35 P.M. <br />PIGCB; Pleasanton Justice Court <br />consensus of opinion was reached on <br />all points. He then explained the <br />route for the two proposed street <br />additions. <br />(Because of lack of information on <br />(specific land use plans (since this <br />is a general plan amendment), staff <br />did not feel justified in delineatin <br />a specific circulation pattern to <br />serve these areas. The ad hoc com- <br />mittee agreed with this position, <br />except that some members of the com- <br />mittee worried how the frontage road <br />would terminate at its eastern end. <br />They felt an exact route should be <br />described. <br />Next, Don Savery spoke. His concern: <br />were the manner in which traffic <br />would be routed to I-580. He wished <br />to know if Hopyard Road was schedules <br />to be widened at I-580. As an alter- <br />native, he proposed that additional <br />access be provided running interiorly <br />and northerly to exit at the frontage <br />road and thence to I-580. He did <br />not wish to see any more accesses <br />onto Hopyard Road, apart from the <br />scheduled Stoneridge Drive and the <br />frontage road. <br />Commissioner Carrigan then asked Mr. <br />Savery whether the ad hoc committee <br />had any recommendation for termina- <br />tion of Stoneridge Drive at its <br />eastern end. Mr. Savery stated he <br />could not recall that the committee <br />did. <br />Next Mr. Bob Pearson, recounted the <br />history on this matter. He directed <br />his remarks toward the eastern ter- <br />minus of the circulation plan. He <br />disagreed with staff's recommenda- <br />tions, since the EIR written for the <br />Willow West rezoning indicates that <br />-2- <br />___... . <br />