My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN092099
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1999
>
CCMIN092099
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:17 AM
Creation date
10/11/1999 8:29:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
9/20/1999
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
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
Mr. Tarver said many times there have been comments that staff has made <br />assurances. But nothing is decided until there is a public hearing and Council takes an <br />action. He did not think staff would presume to know what a Council or Planning <br />Commission decision would be before it was made at a public hearing. <br /> <br /> Mr. Bach did not object to the easement, but at the appropriate time. When the <br />pathway issue first came up, there was to be a street. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver said the path has to be included in the Bozorgzad PUD if there is no <br />other way to solve the situation. <br /> <br /> Mr. Bach said there is a way when the properties are developed the area is no <br />longer agricultural. He has been there twenty years and this will destroy his lifestyle. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver wanted the pathway constructed now. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said the other options require moving the path to the other side of the <br />Bozorgzad property. Staff has reviewed various other locations and none of them are <br />very practical. It makes the most sense to have the path on the west side of the property. <br />With the Bach property' s likely development pattern being to have access taken off the <br />future extension of the private street running up the east boundary of the Bach property <br />rather than the west side. That would minimize the length of the pedestrian connection <br />and utilize the ultimate streets in the area, which is why staff recommended deferring <br />construction until the Bach property is developed. If Council wants the path installed <br />now, the only practical option is to still have it on the west side of the Bozorgzad <br />property between the Bach and Bozorgzad property and to direct staff to try and work out <br />the issues with respect to the potential impacts on the horse pasture as well as on the <br />Bozorgzad's privacy issues. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti if the City could obtain deeds for the proposed easement now to <br />guarantee that the path would ultimately be built. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said the condition requires a deed from Mr. Bach for the easement, but <br />that the path would not be constructed until such time as his property were developed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver believed that at the time the Specific Plan was being reviewed, <br />consideration was given to the path and to agricultural uses, but one was not determined <br />to be more important than the other. Staff encouraged Mr. Bozorgzad to subdivide his <br />property so that it could be determined how everything would be laid out to accomplish <br />the Specific Plan. He felt all the property owners were in agreement with the Specific <br />Plan and how it was to be built out. He firmly believed this path was necessary. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis clarified that there would be an easement for the trail without that <br />condition. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said yes. <br /> 17 09/20/99 <br />Pleasanton City Council <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.