My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN040798
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1998
>
CCMIN040798
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:27 AM
Creation date
2/3/1999 4:08:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/7/1998
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
after two years it was not done. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said it would not. If the map is recorded the PUD would not lapse. The only <br />thing that would keep someone from building a house is the Planning Commission condition <br />stating no building permit can be issued. The Planning Commission approved the timing of the <br />requirement for the storm drain and the trail. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti did not have any problem with making the dedication more specific. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said the problem was solved by modifying the condition that was in front of <br />the Planning Commission to indicate that what is shown on the PUD plan would be what is <br />dedicated. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti had no problem in saying that the permit would not lapse until two years <br />after the infrastructure was in place. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver said there has been numerous discussions on the North Sycamore Specific <br />Plan and what the conditions should be. He felt the three parcels should help pay for its share <br />of the infrastructure. If all the other conditions are met in terms of the studies that are required, <br />then why not let this go through the timing phase similar to Greenbriar's process. He did not <br />want to make any changes other than the Planning Commissions recommendation that no <br />building permits be issued. He could support staff's recommendation except for condition <br />number 3. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said there would not be any inconsistencies with doing that. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta said it is difficult to say no to a single property owner wanting a building <br />permit. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Mayor Tarver to accept staff's recommendation except for <br />Condition No. 2 and No. 3. <br /> <br /> There was no immediate second. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said what would happen is that there would be a requirement to record a <br />declaration of restrictions with the final map such that would put a prospective purchaser on <br />notice that a building permit would not be issued until the infrastructure was available. Staff's <br />recommendation is that the map not get recorded until that happened. The Mayor's motion is <br />that the map could be recorded but these restrictions would be recorded against the property <br />pending the infrastructure being constructed on the north side. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 4/7/98 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> 13 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.