My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 02/25/1998
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1998
>
PC 02/25/1998
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/16/2017 3:58:28 PM
Creation date
10/7/2008 9:01:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/25/1998
DOCUMENT NAME
02/25/1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
many issues need to be further evaluated such as traffic, crowding of the schools, the impact of proposed <br />expansion of the Livermore Municipal Airport, cut-through traffic, and the link from Stoneridge Drive to <br />El Charro. She further expressed concern that low income housing planned for the area will reduce the <br />value of the market value homes. She suggested that the entire east side area plan be re-evaluated under <br />the open-ended general plan. <br />Don Reeves, 2766 Huff Drive, feels that the cun•ent economy dictates that the East Side Plan needs to be <br />re-evaluated since so much has changed over the past ten yeazs. He strongly supports an East Side <br />Specific Plan Study to conform with the General Plan. He also feels that the community should be <br />involved as much as possible. <br />Cazl Pretzel, 3633 Glacier Court North, feels that the whole plan should be re-evaluated. He feels that <br />the City should strongly consider what the community wants and needs. In addition, he feels a new <br />specific plan should be written that supports all of the General Plan elements. In order to do that, the <br />entire east side needs to be re-evaluated because so much has changed since the original plan. In <br />addition, he feels that a committee including objective residents should be involved in the study, and that <br />the committee should be chaired by a local citizen rather than a City employee. In response to a <br />question by Commissioner Wright, he stated that he would like the study to include the general plan <br />elements, but would like the land uses to be re-evaluated. <br />Steve Belecky, 3644 Kamp Drive, stated that he moved to Pleasanton in 1977 and has seen a lot of <br />change since that time, both in terms of growth and level of community interest. In addition, he <br />acknowledged that the general plan and the specific plan need to be re-addressed and re-prioritized based <br />- on the changes that have occurred over the past yeazs. He stated that there is very little land left to build <br />on and, therefore, the use of the land is critical in order to keep Pleasanton a quality city. He commented <br />that in the future he would like to upgrade his family home to a nicer home with a much larger yard. <br />However, due to space constraints, he does not see how that can happen. He also stated the he believes <br />Ponderosa violated the civil rights of several residents by using strong-arm tactics and feels it's wrong to <br />support them since they have hired people to interfere with residents' free rights. He feels a study should <br />be done which addresses the current needs and concerns of the community. He does not want to see <br />Stoneridge Drive extended to EI Chano because he feels that will generate too much additional traffic. <br />In addition, he would like the study to evaluate the best use of the land and the potential traffic impact <br />on the surrounding community. In closing, he stated that he feels very encouraged by the strong <br />community interest in this issue. <br />Judy Symcox, 1450 Groth Circle, said her neighborhood which is located at the Valley entrance to <br />Danbury Park has not been considered in the plan. She stated that she is speaking on behalf of Danbury <br />Pazk residents. She is not opposed to additional residential communities in the area, as long as they are <br />not subsidized homes. Her main concern is with the arterial streets. She further stated that when she <br />purchased in Pleasanton Meadows 24 years ago, everyone knew W. Las Positas would eventually go <br />through to Livermore. Then Pleasanton Councils and Commissions made deals along the way to block <br />W. Las Positas in exchange for the new improved Stoneridge Drive plan to the east. She stated that <br />there is an ethical duty to keep that agreement with the people. She further stated that when she <br />purchased in Danbury Park 13 years ago, Valley Avenue did not go through. Valley Avenue is now the <br />only arterial street to carry east/west traffic. She feels that traffic on Valley can only be eased when the <br />agreement to open Stoneridge Drive is honored. She further reported that Danbury Park children must <br />Planning Commission Page 18 February 25, 1998 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.