Laserfiche WebLink
4~$~$"~~~y CITY of PLEA~ANTON <br />,~ .~,. <br />`~ ~~~° Planning Co~nr~i~~ion <br />~A so t <br />MINUTES ~OF REGULAR MEETING. <br />D018 : March 10, 1976 <br />Time : s:oo P.M. <br />FIaCe; Pleasanton Justice Court <br />in the facilities/expenses. Com- <br />missioner Carrigan remained with the <br />feeling that several issues needed <br />resolving, and greater communication <br />among parties involved. <br />Next, Mr. Sam Portillo, 7221 Stone- <br />dale Drive, spoke. He hesitated <br />about speaking on this issue, since <br />his issue was the location of the <br />proposed recreational vehicle yard. <br />He did not wish for his remarks to <br />reflect on this rezoning matter. <br />Next, Mr. Braden introduced their <br />legal counsel, Mr. Sam Young, 1134 <br />Bellina Boulevard, Alameda. He <br />agreed more discussion was needed <br />between the groups, but felt sure <br />problems would be resolved regard- <br />less of what action may be taken on <br />this particular request. He cited <br />economic reasons for Stoneson wish- <br />ing to change from townhouses to <br />single. family homes. .Also raised <br />the question of the sewer problems <br />which suddenly confronted Pleasanton, <br />and which placed Stoneson in a <br />peculiar position. He next read <br />portions from. the C C & R's and <br />explained them. He stressed that in <br />requesting this rezoning, it is not <br />Stoneson's intent to ignore-the <br />homeowners' concerns. <br />The president of the Stoneson town- <br />house association, Anthony Mello, <br />then spoke. He worried that with <br />the reduced number of owners, they <br />would not be able to support the <br />development. <br />Mr. St. John also spoke in rebuttal <br />to Mr. Young, stating that at the <br />time of his purchase of his town- <br />house, it was clearly pointed out by <br />maps in the sales office that it <br />-4- <br />