CCMIN091592 - Laserfiche WebLink

42 Ms. Acosta pointed out the process was just beginning. Mr. Tarver indicated he did not support a 1400 ft. cul de sac and agreed there were safety issues in connection with a street at the top of a hill. He was glad to see Mr. Hatsushi and the neighbors willing to work together. Ms. Mohr asked when the Study could be complete. Mr. Swift believed it would be six to eight months before final consideration of an EIR for the Corridor Study. There have been many meetings already, but these people can be included in the process immediately. Mr. Tarver asked when there would be a resolution of the left over parcel and how long will it sit in its current state. Mr. Swift indicated that if the parcel were designated as a park it would be a very long time before improvements could be made. Development of a park in conjunction with development of that area is a number of years out. Mr. Butler indicated he was prepared to take action on this matter and could not support any resolution to eliminate potential access. He agreed with the staff that more than one connection was necessary. The issue of how long the land stays bare is minor _ compared to solving the problem. If this can be included in the study and all parties work together for the best answer, that is more important than landscaping now. He further indicated the property was inadequate for a park by itself. It was moved by Ms. Mohr, seconded by Ms. Scribner, to take no action with respect to this piece of property until the Specific Plan for Vineyard Avenue with neighborhood participation, is prepared. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers Butler, Mohr, Scribner, Tarver and Mayor Mercer NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Item 12b Analysis of State Budqet Reduction and Impacts on Pleasanton (IR92:69) Council accepted the staff report. No action was required or taken. 9/15/92 16