My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN071994
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1994
>
CCMIN071994
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:54:30 AM
Creation date
5/21/1999 11:31:47 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
It was moved by Ms. Scribner, seconded by Ms. Mohr, to continue this item. <br /> <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers Dennis, Mohr, Scribner and Mayor Tarver <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: Councilmember Pico <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br />Item 6e <br />Discussion of Citv's nosition regarding LAVWMA's proposal for a Sewer Capacity <br />Expansion Project (Consideration of EBDA's offer to Sell wastewater disposal capaeit_V <br />rights to LAVWMA) (SR94:249) <br /> <br /> Ms. Scribner indicated the three items in the staff report which are suggested for <br />LAVW1VIA to do are needed to be done in any event. The question is whether there is enough <br />time to obtain all such information and still place the item on the November ballot. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta believed there was not enough time to get all the information. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver strongly objected to the November deadline for the offer. <br /> <br /> Craig Lawson, representing LAVWMA, indicated that LAVWMA has not taken a firm <br />position on the EBDA offer. It wanted to be sum there was reasonable chance to use the outfall <br />and to be sure the EBDA offer was firm. In the absence of approval from the other <br />jurisdictions, LAVWMA did not want to spend a lot of money on investigations. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr indicated the traffic mitigation fee was not acceptable and the urban limit lines <br />should be reviewed by the General Plan Review Committee. She asked if Dublin is a party to <br />this. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lawson replied that Dublin will be asked to do the same as other cities regarding <br />urban limit lines. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver pointed out that if there is no expansion project, then the City will be faced <br />with $20 million in repairs to the existing pipeline. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr asked if a reverse osmosis plant was being investigated. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lawson indicated LAVWMA has been looking at alternatives. He stated that there <br />is still the problem of correcting the current lining of the pipeline and other problems. <br />LAVWMA needs time to study all the other options. <br /> <br />07/19/94 13 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.