My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN021594
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1994
>
CCMIN021594
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:54:31 AM
Creation date
5/21/1999 11:08:27 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.
/
16
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
Frank Berlogar, 2200 Vineyard Avenue, spoke in opposition to placing requirements for <br />public notice, etc. He explained that when grapes are ready to harvest, there must be no delay_._. <br />or else the farmer loses the crop. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico stated that the agricultural land which is annexed into the City should remain <br />as agricultural land. He did not understand why this ordinance was needed. He felt that the <br />ordinance is one-sided and does not address the needs of the adjacent residents. Mr. Pico <br />believed that the ordinance should be rewritten to provide an understanding of how the City <br />operates in these types of buffered areas and how it addresses the neighbors concerns. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver agreed with Mr. Pico. He stated that the ordinance should include a way <br />the City can help the residents and farmers work together. He supported the idea of trying to <br />protect the right to farm and agricultural land but there needs to be some discussion of how the <br />City can effectively do so. <br /> <br /> This item was continued to enable staff to address the following concerns expressed by <br />Council: 1) review State regulations regarding pesticicle use; 2) discuss potential regulations with <br />viticulturalists; 3) discuss noticing requirements for certain farming procedures (spraying or <br />excessive noise); and 4) review possible regulations for a buffer area. <br /> <br />Item 10b <br />Report Relarding Traffic Signal at Main/Rose/Neal (8R94:50) <br /> <br /> Mr. van Gelder presented the staff report. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis found that the flashing signal was confusing during rush hour. She asked <br />if it were possible to leave the flashing signal on until a specific time of day (rush hour). <br /> <br /> Mr. van Gelder would not recommend doing so. <br /> <br /> Robert Cordtz, 262 W. Angela, was concerned with the air pollution on Main Street. <br />He believed that the congestion problem from First Street is moving onto Main Street. <br /> <br /> Pat Murray, 4470 Mirador, agreed that the traffic problem is coming from First Street. <br />She described the congestion and typical problems she has in commuting on this road. She was <br />in favor of placing a stop sign at Neat and First Streets. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr believed that the traffic signal should be fully functional at the Main/Rose/Neal <br />intersection. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Ms. Mohr, and seconded by Mr. Pico, to retain the traffic signal <br />installation. <br /> <br />02/15/94 8 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.