My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN100797
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1997
>
CCMIN100797
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:36 AM
Creation date
5/10/1999 6:09:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/7/1997
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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
Mayor Tarver asked if the properties would be required to pay a portion. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said the Ruby Hills Pre-annexation Agreement requires Signature to pay a pro <br /> ratio share of the Vineyard Avenue Corridor improvements. The S-curve is essentially in the <br /> study because Ruby Hill is required to pay its share. He said in regard to the water line, when <br /> Ruby Hill was developed, it had a stand-alone water system with a direct feed off the Zone 7 <br /> line with its own water tanks. The Water Department would like to connect those water tanks <br /> to the existing water tanks that the City has at the same elevation. To do this, an 18 inch water <br /> line would be required to run the full length. This is just one of the proposals that is being <br /> looked at. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver suggested to have staff look at a 150 units plus inn/spa/commercial wine <br /> alternative and a 200 unit alternative. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis would like to see two scenarios for the 150 units. One that minimizes the <br /> infrastructure costs by a different distributions of the units and one that spreads the units out <br /> more. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver asked if the plan would include density transfer discussions. <br />__ Ms. Dennis said yes. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala would like to see one plan that showed no subsidy. Could there be three <br /> alternatives, with 150 units at the lower end with two scenarios as Becky indicated; and the <br /> infrastructure paying for itself at the higher end. She would like to see a plan that does not <br /> include a City subsidy. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis felt that the public would not accept a no subsidy plan because it would <br /> require too many units. It would have to be determined what is being avoided in order to have <br /> no subsidy. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala felt the public needed to see a whole range of alternatives. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver said there could also be a no development alternative. It is a question of <br /> what is the balance between what the community could tolerate. If the City wanted the <br /> infrastructure paid for with the development, then staff has to go through a process to look at <br /> the specifics to see what is fair and feasible. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico was willing to look at a program where the City invested up to 25% of <br /> infrastructure costs. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala agreed. She felt the public needed a range to choose from. <br /> <br /> Pleasanton City Council 10/07/97 <br /> Minutes 16 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.