Laserfiche WebLink
°'"~"'°° CITY of PLEASANTON <br />Planning Commission <br />MINUTES ~OF REGULAR MEETING. <br />DG18 : October 29, 1975 <br />Time: s:oo P.M. <br />PIOCe; Pleasanton Justice Court <br />Mr. William Leonard, Associated <br />Building Industry, in Hayward, liti- <br />gants in the Petaluma case, also <br />spoke on the formula established by <br />EPA on the E-zero population theory, <br />and the growth cost revenue status. <br />He presented a large number of <br />reference books on the subject and <br />offered them for Commission and <br />staff review. He basically reiter- <br />ated the position taken by Mr. Oakes.; <br />Next Ted Fairfield of MacKay & Somps <br />spoke. He presented information <br />which mirrored the position esta- <br />blished by those who spoke before <br />him. <br />Mr. Joe Burkhardt, representing the <br />developers of the Stoneridge Shop- <br />ping Center spoke next. He re- <br />ferred to the impact of reduced <br />population on the development of <br />the shopping center, pointing out <br />that it could seriously jeopardize <br />its development. Chairman Wood <br />asked Mr. Burkhardt if the restricte <br />growth rate is adopted would it mean <br />that Pleasanton would not get the <br />shopping center? Mr. Burkhardt <br />replied that reevaluation would <br />have to be made, that nothing could <br />be said for certain at this time. <br />Next Woody Pereira, of Morrison <br />Homes spoke. He commented regarding <br />the suggested resolution limiting <br />growth to 48,700 and the validity of <br />such a move, but perhaps in 20 years <br />it will not. He asked that the <br />City not inadvertently close the <br />door to this community based on <br />questionable basis of facts applied <br />by those agencies not within the <br />area. He felt that any holding <br />capacity for the community should be <br />periodically reviewed, and not cast <br />-5- <br />