My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN120495
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
CCMIN120495
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:54:07 AM
Creation date
5/21/1999 7:44:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
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
is a single entrance to this area via Pleasanton Avenue, so it is not a response time question so <br />much as what happens if the cul-de-sac area is blocked in some fashion and emergency vehicles <br />can't reach that area. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico was frustrated to find out so late that what he thought was a significant <br />condition on the project to insure the public health and safety of the neighborhood is a condition <br />that has no effect. To think that we have no recourse but to take an action contrary to the safety <br />of the community because of some State law that says we have to is wrong. He believed this <br />is adding many units and people in a tight area with only one way in and out and he did not <br />think this was safe or reasonable. He voted for this project subject to that condition and if that <br />condition cannot be met, then the project should not go ahead and the City should do everything <br />it can to protect its interests and those of the future neighbors. Without that EVA, this project <br />should not be built. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarvet asked if it was likely that an eminent domain action could be completed in <br />180 days. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush responded that the eminent domain action did not have to be completed in 180 <br />days. The 180 days is just to continue negotiations and failing that, then the eminent domain <br />action would be started within that 180 days. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico did not believe l~lew Cities would delay construction until conclusion of the <br />eminent domain action. He believed this could create potential liability for the City without the <br />EVA. <br /> <br /> Mr. Bates pointed out that the City had a street over the nilroad at the point of the EVA <br />and gave up its access. He is not certain the City might still have rights of access. He pointed <br />out this was a condition he may or may not be able to meet. He was willing to post bond for <br />the improvements, but he did not believe it was a matter of discretion at this point. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush indicated the staff report set forth the process at this point. Everyone on staff <br />shares Mr. Pico's concern that the EVA was going to be there. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver asked whether the City gave up its access to the area during the consolidation <br />of the rnilroads. He felt that would make it extremely difficult in an eminent domain action to <br />say the City wanted it back. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush stated that was part of the agreement, but was for access by the public <br />generally. He felt there were good reasons to show that the area will still remain barricaded so <br />that only emergency vehicles could get across. He feels something could be worked out with <br />the railroads so that emergency vehicles will have access. <br /> <br />12/04/95 -19- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.