Laserfiche WebLink
41'$~-SAIV jay <br />CITY of <br />PLEASANTON <br />%. <br /> <br />.~ <br />`~~~° <br />~ <br />~ ~ . <br />Planning <br />Commission <br />MMf ~ <br />22~ <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES ' <br />c'~ <br />~• <br />~OF REGULAR MEETING. <br /> Dote : May 23, 1972 <br /> Time : 8:55 P.M. <br /> PIQCe; Pleasanton Justice Court <br />Commissioner Pons stated that the <br />Commission had agreed to hear both <br />presentations from Stoneson and Homar~ <br />In fact, the whole month of February <br />had been reserved by the Commission <br />and staff to take care of this matter <br />The reality is that no such presenta- <br />tion was made by either interest in <br />the way of visual aids, experts <br />present to answer questions, movies, <br />etc. <br />As far as requesting Livingston & <br />Blayney to make such a study, he <br />!feels it is the applicant's responsi- <br />bility in this case. <br />,Commissioner Hirst wished to know <br />whether the BART line referred to <br />by Mr. Mariani in the General Plan <br />is the actual route adopted by the <br />BART directors. Mr. Di Manto indi- <br />cated that to his knowledge, it is a <br />general alignment and subject to cha <br />The definite route has not yet been <br />formally adopted at this time. <br />Commissioner Hirst then asked the <br />applicant if it is their intention <br />to develop this land in the same <br />manner as Homart. They replied that <br />98 acres is to be devoted to a <br />shopping center. The reason render- <br />ings have not been submitted is that <br />they are faced with the problem that <br />neither applicant has fulfilled <br />their commitment to the Director of <br />Community Development and Commission <br />to submit a total presentation. <br />-4- <br />