|
Mr, Bissell presented cost comparisons and .~ ~. ~i~n there
<br /> be a substantial savings to the City on the ~,'.~ille..~-o! ..=~=st site. lie fur--
<br /> ther stated that in all likelihood the proposed ?,~"' = tation ~-~ould be
<br /> located in the vicinity of the Willo~-West site~ ~ ' ~.~ t]~.e hill area
<br /> presented a problem in locating a station west o .--state #680,
<br />
<br />~_ Dr, Williams{ Superintendent of Schools, ~u~- ~'~-.lao! District,
<br /> stated that satisfactory regotiations ~.~ere undez '~=-'~ool sites,
<br />
<br /> Mr, Dudley Dado, Southern Pacific Railroad .=~tated his
<br /> ~ompany supported the proposed Willow-~,=~est regic r~cl center.
<br />
<br /> Mr, Doyle Alexander, representative of the ~ -'..=~- .t>~=i~ Saints
<br /> Church, owners of property in the area, stated thc C=~urch had tried
<br /> unsuccessfully to sell their property and were ir~..s.i_~!?~'~-t of the pro-
<br /> posed Willow-West site as a means to dispose or d~!.~{~!_op their property,
<br />
<br /> Mr, Taubman summarized the Stoneridge prescnta~ i=~ by stating
<br /> that since department stores are already co~mitte~.=l ~.c~ t]'xi~_~ ?roposed
<br /> complex, development of this center could begin
<br />
<br /> Mr, Deasy, in summarizing for Willow-West st-_?=.~<2 tl~e proposed
<br /> shopping center should be on the site that will l=_TM.== t'. for the City,
<br /> and that his company is prepared to cooperate in ...' i..=iy possible and
<br /> urged favorable consideration of the advantages ~'c · '='..'-~incJ the Willow-
<br /> West site,
<br />
<br /> .It was moved by Councilman Mori, and second~ . .!!ncilman Kinney,
<br /> that the public hearings on the application of S. ~ !_'c~--p., and the
<br /> appeal of Willow-West Properties be closed,
<br /> The roll call vote was as follo~.~s:
<br />~ AYES: Councilmen Herlihy, Kinney, Mori, Pearsc~'~ '-.~. ~.~¥or Reid
<br /> NOES: None
<br /> ABSENT ~ None
<br />
<br /> Mayor Reid commended both applicants on their tremendous amount
<br /> of information made available, and reflected upor= =l~.'.=c. im7;,ortant decision
<br /> before the City Council in regard to a decision o~·-= -.i~:.~ n~atter.
<br />
<br /> Councilman Herlihy stated his concern about the ~..'idening of Hopyard
<br /> Road to seven lanes, what would happen to Tassajai-c~, end the mixing of
<br /> industrial with commercial in regard to the propo--~c.='~ l~illo~-?!Iest site,
<br /> and favored the Stoneridge site as being the most =l._..~,~.?.zngeous for the
<br /> City,
<br />
<br /> Councilman Pearson agreed with Councilman He.' .... ~ and elaborated
<br /> upon the importance of the final decision,
<br />
<br /> Councilman Kinney complimented both applica-'=._ =]~eir input,
<br /> stating that after considering all the informat-!~.~ ~'=;.'9red the
<br /> Stoneridge site to be in the best interests of t.'-.. -~-.... ~-~f Pleasanton.
<br />
<br /> It was moved by Councilman Mori, and secondcc~..~.<.~' Councilman
<br /> Herlihy, the Ordinance No. 681, approving the ap?]/c3. tion of the Plan-
<br /> ning Commission of the City of Pleasanton to amenel =i~e ex~szing zoning
<br />- for that property bounded on the north by Interst~ti=~ ![igh~..xa¥ #580, on
<br /> the east by Interstate }Iighway #680, on the sout]~ '-- =~.=cneridge Drive
<br /> and on-the west by Foothill Road, Said propertLz c~-==i {c--'c.l=<=.sed amend-
<br /> ments described more precisely as follows: To tke C-!i <Ccnunercial
<br /> Regional) District those parcels defined as follo=.2: -.'-'~c=rt~.on of 941-
<br /> 1201-12-3, 941-1201-9, Portion of 941~1201-10, 9.1-~-i2~.~I-~q, 941-1201-7,
<br /> 941-1201-6, Portion of 941-1201-5, 941-1201-1, P,r _u'-c~_". of 941-1201-2,
<br /> said parcels containing more or less 178,045 acre=~= =~- introduced,
<br /> The roll call vote was as follows:
<br /> AYES: Councilmen IXerlihy, Kinney, ~'4ori, Pearsc'~ .~! ~yor Reid
<br /> NOES: None
<br /> ABSENT: None
<br />
<br /> -6- 10/30/72
<br />
<br />
<br />
|