Laserfiche WebLink
4y$~SAlyjoy <br />~~, . <br />~,:: <br />~xxss t <br />CITY of PLEASANTON <br />Planning Commission <br />MINUTES ~OF REGULAR MEETING. <br />DC?8 ; February 23, 1971 <br />Time : s: oo PM <br />f~a C8; Pleasanton Justice Court <br />Clarification was given to Mr. Seymour that <br />the Macco/Meadowlark property is not at this <br />time coming in with multiples. The multiple <br />within the Stone son development is clustered <br />around the regional center site, and the <br />other development at Stoneridge and Springda <br />is a single-family townhouse development and <br />will eventually have access through #680. <br />The Fa lender development has a multiple area <br />slated for 150 units to be located off <br />West Las Positas Blvd. and #680, again with <br />access off ~k680. The only other multiple <br />zoning is at the Castlewood Enterprises <br />property. <br />Regarding the Macco/Meadowlark property, a <br />tentative development plan had been submitt <br />showing multiples, single-family and open <br />park land. However, this was only in a <br />tentative stage, and nothing has been heard <br />on this since. In addition, it is now the <br />understanding that Macco has sold out to <br />Penn Central. Further, that annexation of <br />the previous Macco property to the City has <br />now been dropped completely. <br />A Mr. Gerry Beck, resident of Stoneridge, <br />also received clarification on the Stoneson <br />townhouse development. <br />The Public Hearing was then closed. <br />At this point in the proceedings, Mrs. Ruth <br />Amaral requested permission to present her <br />position, stating she was unaware the public <br />hearing had already been closed. Chairman <br />Carrigan then reopened the hearing. <br />Mrs. Amaral presented movies of the Foothill <br />Road area taken several years back, which <br />depicted the beauty, solitude and serenity <br />of the area . <br />Mr. Roessler, then interjected and requested <br />that all persons speaking in opposition stat <br />whether they were citizens of Pleasanton or <br />were residing in the County. <br />- 6 - <br />