Laserfiche WebLink
CITY of PL~ASANTON <br />Planning Commission <br />M-INUT~~ ~OF REGU~_AR MEfiTING. <br />OQfa ~ December 12, 1973 <br />Timet 8~os P.M. <br />Pla~~l' Pleasanton Justice Court <br />City Attorney clarified for ail pre- <br />sent that the plan, when it is <br />adopted will have a statement in- <br />serted on it that it is a represen- <br />tation only of proposed land uses; <br />that it is impossible to be defini- <br />tive. There is no statute of limi- <br />tations as far as bringing the zon- <br />ing map into conformance with the <br />General Plan map. <br />Next Mr. William Gale, 62 W. Neal <br />Street, spoke. His comments were <br />directed to the lands on Foothill <br />Road. He stated that he is co-owner <br />of 42 acres on the east side of <br />'Foothill Road immediately north of <br />the Meadowlark Dairy property. In <br />examining the land use map, it <br />appeared that the land was designated <br />for park land. He asked for some <br />consideration on this. Mr. Harris <br />explained that this concept was <br />formulated by the former Parks and <br />Recreation Director. It had been <br />submitted to the Park and Recreation <br />Commission. It was staff's opinion <br />that there is a need for a park <br />since there is a large area of pro- <br />posed single family residential. <br />The park could perhaps be reduced to <br />ten acres, and perhaps consider <br />lincreasing the size of Moller Park by <br />1three to four acres and bring it to <br />",the intersection of Stoneridge Drive <br />?.and Foothill Road. <br />After further discussion and examina- <br />tion of all the park sites shown on <br />the map, it was determined that the <br />park site lay within the Meadowlark <br />Dairy lands. <br />Chairman Pereira wanted it inserted <br />in the record that there is con- <br />sistency and credibility of the <br />-5- <br /> <br />\\ <br />~~~\ <br />\\\\\ <br />»~»> <br />i <br />I <br />i <br />. a <br />