My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN040197
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1997
>
CCMIN040197
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:36 AM
Creation date
5/10/1999 5:31:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/1/1997
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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
4. CONSENT CALENDAR <br /> <br /> Debra Barker, 5018 Blackbird Way, requested that Item 4h, the final map for Tract 6842 <br />not be approved. This development was not fulfilling its obligation. It has a traffic obligation <br />to fix the S-curve on Vineyard Avenue and she did not understand why Council would move <br />forward on approving a new final map when the development was not fulfilling its obligation. <br />She also heard the developers were suing the city. She felt the City should wait until this issue <br />was resolved. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said Signature Properties had agreed to construct the roadway this spring. <br />There were some provisions in the agreement that could potentially lead to litigation, but at the <br />moment there was no litigation pending. Secondly, with respect to the final map, the rule is the <br />approval is ministerial in nature and so long as the final map substantially conforms with the <br />tentative map, the Council really has no discretion but to approve the final map. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver asked if there would be more final maps submitted for the project. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said there were a number of final maps still to come before Council as to the <br />public improvements. <br /> <br /> Ms. Barker said that Signature was still squabbling over conditions. She said Signature <br />said it would pay for the S-curve. Now Signature was trying to get the taxpayers to pay for it. <br />It was not part of the deal for Signature to build it now, and try to get money for it later. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said the pre-annexation agreement between the City and Signature always <br />assumed that there would be some kind of reimbursement from some source to the Ruby Hill <br />Developers. The question is "how much" and "from whom?" This issue is not fully resolved <br />as of now, but notwithstanding that failure to have it totally resolved, Signature is willing to go <br />ahead this spring and front the money to have the realignment done. There will need to be some <br />details worked out in terms of "who" and "how", but that will be up to Council once the final <br />numbers are in. <br /> <br /> Ms. Barker said she felt if the City did not have an agreement with Signature, the City <br />should not proceed. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala said that the Council voted on this issue two meetings ago and it had been <br />agreed upon. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Ms. Michellotti, seconded by Ms. Ayala, that the following actions <br />be taken on the Consent Calendar: <br /> <br /> a. Approve the City Council Minutes for March 18, 1997. <br /> This item was removed from the agenda. <br /> <br />City Council 04/01/97 <br />Minutes 2 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.