My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN103072
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1970-1979
>
1972
>
CCMIN103072
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:47:28 AM
Creation date
11/18/1999 12:02:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
b. Stoneson whould be put on notice that the City Council, by zoning <br /> to the P.U.D., makes no commitment. to a residential plan, density <br /> or units. ~ <br /> <br /> Mr. Hal Taylor, Assistant District Engineer for Planning Dept., <br />Division of Highways, District 4, San Francisco, spoke regarding the <br />Stoneridge Interchange. He stated that after several months of meetings <br />with City of Pleasanton staff, the Division of Highways feels this Inter- <br />change meets minimum requirements, therefore, is possible. Mr. Taylor <br />presented the lengthy procedure necessary. to get final ~.approval on the <br />Interchange, stating it would take 4 to 5. years. Also. final-approval <br />would depend on funds available for the project: He further stated the <br />Division of Highways would proceed with the feasibility study and pro- <br />vide an answer to the City as soon .as possible. <br /> <br /> Mayor Reid declared the public hearing open on the E.I.S. related <br /> to the Stoneson application. <br /> Mr. Castro summarized the E.I.S. stating this project uses vacant <br />land which is currently devoted to grazing and converts it to intense <br />commercial use. In this connection, there will be a significant impact <br />on the environment. However, because of the improvements anticipated <br />for this development, it will not have a significant adverse effect on <br />the environment. This use, at present and in the foreseeable future, <br />will not degrade the environment. On the contrary, this development <br />appears to be more beneficial to man, his society, culture and environ- <br />ment than any other use including pasture. <br /> <br /> Mr~ Joe Burkhardt, General Manager for Bayshore Properties, repre- <br />senting Stoneson Corp., stated a great deal of study has gone into the <br />E.I.S. provided by the consultants. <br /> <br /> Mr. Don Bissell, Bissell & Karn, Consultants, commended the staff <br />for their work on the E.I.S., however, in reviewing the report, he <br />stated there were three areas which he felt needed further study. The <br />three areas are as follows: Calaveras Fault line in proximity to the <br />Stoneridge site; Foothill Road widening; and the proposed school site. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Councilman Herlihy and seconded by Councilman <br />Kinney that the public hearing on the E.I.S. regarding Stoneridge <br />Regional Shopping Center site be closed. <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmen He~'ii'hy, Kinney, Mori, Pearson and Mayor Reid <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: None <br /> <br /> Mayor Reid declared the public hearing open on the E.I.S. related <br />to the Willow-West Appeal. <br /> Mr. Castro summarized the E..i.S. stating that general agreement <br />is found in the conclusion noted on the E.I.S., those being in the <br />following areas: major increases in tax base, revenues for the City <br />and other agencies, higher level of services, decrease in property <br />tax rates, new employment opportunities, and shopping conveniences. <br />The disagreement-would be that better traffic access and circulation <br />should be provided. It can be said that the road network surrounding <br />the regional site would be upgraded. Control of on-site flooding is <br />irrelevant to the conclusions of this report. Improved safety from <br />improved traffic condition is subjective due to the fact if this large <br />retail commercial/industrial area were to be developed under the condi- <br />tions suggested. This development will very definitely have a signifi- <br />cant impact on the environment and although improvements have been <br />defined, the improvements mentioned in the report might not be quite <br />adequate to mitigate a certain adverse impact on the environment. <br /> <br /> 2. 10/30/72 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.